Linux-Misc Digest #385, Volume #18 Mon, 28 Dec 98 19:13:11 EST
Contents:
Re: Is Microsoft a nasty company ? I'm asking you this question. (Richard Robinson)
expect messing with 8 bit stuff! (Ben Russo)
Re: ln: Musty smell to its man page (brian moore)
Re: Linux in the financial community (Ben Russo)
Re: When will kernel 2.2 be released? (Harry McGregor)
Re: SuSE or RedHat ? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Will Linux ever make it? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Embarrassingly dumb question (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Anti-Linux FUD (Floyd Davidson)
Release -0.79 of SmallEiffel The GNU Eiffel Compiler (Dominique Colnet)
Re: Anti-Linux FUD (Floyd Davidson)
Re: bash error message (Ben Russo)
Re: Anti-Linux FUD ("Anthony W. Youngman")
Re: SparcLinux (Ben Russo)
Re: Is Microsoft a nasty company ? I'm asking you this question.
(joseph_a_philbrook__iii)
Re: Is Microsoft a nasty company ? I'm asking you this question.
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Help w/mail thru proxy server (Ben Russo)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Robinson)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.linux.x,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Is Microsoft a nasty company ? I'm asking you this question.
Date: 28 Dec 1998 19:10:20 -0000
In article <768hb6$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
joseph_a_philbrook__iii <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>While I think this thread has a lot of good stuff that I'd hate to see get
>lost in a blast of gratuitous MS bashing, I think the fact that the subject
>line is:
>
>Subject: Re: Is Microsoft a nasty company ? I'm asking you this question.
>
>makes it highly unlikely that we can expect to keep MS vendetta's out of the
>argument ...
Perhaps you could think again about the newsgroups you're crossposting to,
Newsgroups:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.x,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
and keep it to the ones where advocacy is on topic ?
Thank you.
--
Richard Robinson
"The whole plan hinged upon the natural curiosity of potatoes" - S. Lem
I don't want to receive UCE :- remove 'x' to reply.
------------------------------
From: Ben Russo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.tcl
Subject: expect messing with 8 bit stuff!
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 10:58:22 -0500
Hi,
I have many small scripts like the following:
[brusso@laptop bin]$ cat phlegm-term.tcl
#!/usr/bin/expect
source /home/brusso/bin/.passwds
eval spawn telnet phlegm
set timeout 20
expect ogin:
send "brusso\r"
expect assword:
send "${phlegm-brusso}\r"
interact
I have one file (chmod 700) where I keep passwords for dozens of
systems.
((( I don't need a lecture on security! )))
These have been working great for about a year and a half.
All of the sudden (this morning) I find that when I use them to get
into other
boxes the cursor keys and backspace and escape and function keys are not
working
right!! I don't remember changing anything.
I use "bash" shell. I telnet into another box and I can use the up down
arrows
on my keyboard to go through the shell command history. This used to
work when I was
using the expect scripts above. This morning a manual telnet works.
ALL of the
expect scripts to all of the different hosts DON'T WORK. I can't use vi
or emacs....
It has to be something on my local machine because the same results
occur to dozens
of different hosts. It isn't telnet or termcap, because if I manually
telnet to the
other hosts everything works fine. These problems with 8 bit chars only
happening
when using the expect scripts. Problem only started this morning.
Please help, I have not been able to figure this one out.
-Ben.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.questions,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: ln: Musty smell to its man page
Date: 28 Dec 1998 16:53:02 GMT
On Mon, 28 Dec 1998 03:45:41 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> quota enforcement is very elementary in unix. You can cheat by
> storing data in file name (use multiple file since there are no limit
> in the files you own, if the data is large)
Um, you can have a quota on the number of files. (And for storing data,
it's rather useless, with each filename limited to 255 bytes. Try
hiding 30M or so like that.... then try getting it back.)
> There is also an exploit in http://www.rootshell.com which allow you
> to store data in syslog.
Only works if your admin is an idiot that never reads logs and you feel
like making your abuse known to other users on the system.
(Hardly an exploit: man logger.)
--
Brian Moore | "The Zen nature of a spammer resembles
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | a cockroach, except that the cockroach
Usenet Vandal | is higher up on the evolutionary chain."
Netscum, Bane of Elves. Peter Olson, Delphi Postmaster
------------------------------
From: Ben Russo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux in the financial community
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 11:45:52 -0500
>
>
> >Digging
> >through newsgroups isn't sufficient. I've had messages posted for a week
> >with no response - if my problem were a production problem, I'd be out of a
> >job!!! I know IBM is planning on coming on board, as are other vendors -
> >but until then, it's a risky proposition.
>
> It's a risky proposition for people incapable of doing enough research
> to determine the facts. Of course, NT provides a different set of
> challenges to that same category of people. Such people probably are
> entirely unable to cope with the technical difficulties of dealing with
> any of the true "high availability" systems that are available. (Things
> like MVS and Tandem come to mind.)
>
I work in a shop with lot's of HP-UX servers. These things cost hundreds of
thousands of dollars, and we pay hundreds of dollars every month for each server
for support. Even though I am quite capable of DIY support and maintenance for
these machines, I often demand that our VAR support personnel come to our site
to perform hardware and software upgrades. Since our IS management makes us buy
it I figure we might as well use it. Also, if anything goes wrong I have some
one to blame (CYA).
I constantly argue to my boss and to the various business owners of our
IS systems that we should switch to an Intel based (or at least NON-sole-source
architecture). I also argue that we should move to a UNIX that is
multi-platform and NON-sole-source HARDWARE dependent.
They use the FUD arguments that are in this thread. However they never seem to
recognize that the support we get from our VAR is clueless, they often take
WEEKS to get simple replacement parts like RAM or mounting brackets for cards!
Granted, there is no corollary to the hardware redundancy of a TANDEM for
state-based services.
And there is no NON-proprietary hardware architecture that has the I/O
capabilities of HP systems.
But not one of our IS systems actually needs the hot fail over fault-tolerance
of the TANDEM, and
none of our IS systems uses the 6-12 way interleaved I/O busses of the HP's.
So, what are the reasons we spend SO MUCH MONEY on HP and SUN and TANDEM????
FUD FUD FUD. The management is convinced that HP and SUN and TANDEM make
products that have less hardware problems and less software problems and will
fix things for us if there is a problem.
HAH!!! I say. We have just as many hardware problems and software problems
with those expensive proprietary systems. They often take longer to fix
problems than I could to fix an open system. So, we pay LOTS more money for
stuff we don't need and never use. We could have more RAM and more CPU power
and MORE DISK (the things we DO need) for LESS MONEY with the PC architecture.
We take months to roll out systems instead of days. (hardware acquisition).
We pay hundreds of times more money for systems that only have a usable life of
a few years.
Also, our IS management encourages the use of proprietary "off-the-shelf"
software for FUD reasons as well! But we have been burned many times by the
software company that issues a new version at 2K$ per seat, and then completely
drops support for the old version. Which by the way our internal systems
integration is incompatible with the new systems. Or we have software companies
that realize the problems they have with Y2K issues so they just drop out of
existence. Have you ever actually called software companies to get support with
their software??? I think that most proprietary software companies are closed
source and closed spec because their developers realize what a kludged hacked
together piece of crap they have and they would be embarrassed for anyone to see
behind the curtain.
If we were using Open Source Software packages that were based on Open
standards, then our integration of systems would be transparent to the actual
software subsystems underneath. We could mix and match things where ever they
were most appropriate. We could fix things that were broken. We wouldn't be
forced to pay thousands of dollars for training, or hundreds per hour for
consultants.
--FUD up with it all---Ben.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Harry McGregor)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: When will kernel 2.2 be released?
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 16:54:41 GMT
Ok, so I overestimated M$ quality a bit too much. I prefered to
underestimate the quality of the development code (I also forgot when
the code freze went into place). It still means the same thing:
Yor own workstation/test system run 2.1.xx if you don't mind that much
If you need some part of 2.1.xx, by all means run it
If you are running a server, don't use 2.1.xx unless you *NEED* to.
Harry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: SuSE or RedHat ?
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 16:33:45 GMT
Victor Danilchenko writes:
> To the best of my knowledge, this is also the case with RedHat
> distribution -- the entire thing is copylefted.
I don't think that everything in the Red Hat Official Boxed Set is Open
Source.
> I was just surprised by Destrius stressing the "freeness" of Debian as a
> reason to chose that particular distribution
No package that is not DFSG (essentially, Open Source) compliant is allowed
into Debian's main distribution. All 2700 packages are free. I know of no
other distribution that does this.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Will Linux ever make it?
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 10:37:08 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the 27 Dec 1998 17:50:09 -0500, David Steuber...
..and <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus) writes:
>
> > On could even imagine a whole hierarchy of binary delta parts that could be
> > put together, just like configuring a kernel where every part has already
> > been compiled.
>
> I don't think that would work because of all the permutations. A
> better and simpler way is to do all hardware support with kernel
> loadable modules.
Yeah. Of course it's the better way.
I even think compiling from source into a monolithic kernel is a better way.
But it probably would be doable.
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] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Embarrassingly dumb question
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 10:31:46 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the 28 Dec 1998 00:41:55 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
..and <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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 *).
Probably the best way to do this is to glimpseindex(1) the whole MANPATH and
perhaps /usr/doc, too, so you can use glimpse(1) for full-text searches over
the entire documentation.
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] (Floyd Davidson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.x,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Anti-Linux FUD
Date: 28 Dec 1998 15:51:02 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Victor Danilchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why is it disgusting? This is, for my CS department, the method of
>choice for keeping everything orderly. You don't want to answer endless
>questions like "uhhh, duh, I can't run app blah-blah-blah" by telling
>them "prepend /export/share/blah/bin to your path". Much easier for all
>parties involved to simply put all the symlinks into one directory, and
>maintain them via scripts. Less pain for tech support, less pain for
>users, and everything is still nice and orderly.
You aren't seriously linking the X11R6 bin progs that way are you?
The right way is to prepend it to the PATH variable defined in
/etc/profile.
BTW, what would a "share" directory be doing in a PATH statement?
Floyd
--
Floyd L. Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pictures of the North Slope at <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dominique Colnet)
Crossposted-To: gnu.announce,gnu.utils.bug,alt.sources.d
Subject: Release -0.79 of SmallEiffel The GNU Eiffel Compiler
Date: 28 Dec 1998 09:23:05 GMT
The SmallEiffel team is happy to announce release
-0.79 of SmallEiffel, The GNU Eiffel compiler !
It is freely available from :
http://SmallEiffel.loria.fr
Please note that the official SmallEiffel link has changed.
It is better to use only http://SmallEiffel.loria.fr in
your pages.
--
What's new in this release (extract from the
SmallEiffel/misc/HISTORY.txt file):
Release - 0.79 - Tuesday December 22th, 1998.
* The new Eiffel construct Precursor as described OOSC2 is now
implemented..
* The Eiffel expression strip is now implemented.
* Extended anchored definition to accept infix and prefix feature
names. For example, this kind of declaration is now accepted :
foo: like infix "+".
* Classes COLLECTION2, ARRAY2 and FIXED_ARRAY2 of lib_std completely
revisited.
* Fixed a bug related to calls of the form f.g.h; on expanded
objects.
* Fixed a bug related to inheritance of generic classes.
* Fixed bugs related to assertions checking in case of exceptions
(rescue clause, retry). Improved cycle detection in assertions.
* Fixed bug in GC related to recycling of "monsters" (very large
resizable objets).
* Fixed an incredible bug in the implementation of the like Current
type mark. ;-).
* Fixed many others bugs ($ operator, GC for alpha DEC, ...).
* System customization file for the BeOS system added in the "sys"
sub-directory (more on [2]system customization).
* Contents of the environment variable SmallEiffel must be now set
with the absolute path of the file "system.se" which is in the
sub-directory "sys" of the installation directory.
Under a UNIX-like system, the value of the SmallEiffel environment
variable may be for example: /usr/lib/SmallEiffel/sys/system.se
Commands are also more robust when this environment variable
contains non-alphanumeric characters.
* No more ensure assertion in GENERAL.get_environment_variable.
* Commands [3]compile_to_jvm and [4]print_jvm_class completely
revisited (Java byte-code can be now used with the -verify Java
option).
* Validity rule VDRD.6 is now enforced.
* Balancing rule (automatic promotion) for INTEGER, DOUBLE and REAL
is now implemented.
* Recursive once routines now work correctly.
* Unmodified generated C files are not touched anymore.
* Assertions correctly checked for all external C routines.
* Exception handling now works when an exception occurs in external
C code.
* Cleaned the compiler and decreased its memory footprint.
Joyeux Noel
--
==============================================================
Dominique COLNET -- UHP (Nancy 1) -- LORIA -- INRIA Lorraine
http://SmallEiffel.loria.fr -- The GNU Eiffel Compiler
POST: Loria, B.P. 239,54506 Vandoeuvre les Nancy Cedex, FRANCE
EMAIL: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice:+33 0383593079 Fax:+33 0383413079
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Floyd Davidson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.x,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Anti-Linux FUD
Date: 28 Dec 1998 22:18:04 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Victor Danilchenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The right way is to prepend it to the PATH variable defined in
>> /etc/profile.
>>
>> BTW, what would a "share" directory be doing in a PATH statement?
>
> It's a department LAN supporting about 10 different UNIX flavors, and a
>few hundreds machines (most of the Alpha, Solaris, and Linux). One thing
>you do NOT want to do is make changes local to every system (many of the
>Linux boxes are actually Linux/Windows dual boot). The "right way"
>simply is not viable is such an environment.
> BTW, it's "share" -- as opposed to "common". Platform-dependent vs.
>platform-independent stuff. the decision was made before I came here.
I'm not sure that I'd agree that it can't be done the "right"
way, since that is the way most folks do it even with the same
or a larger number of versions and machines. However, that is
not really the point. You have a specialized need, whether it
is topography or history makes no difference. My point is that
if your needs are unusual, fine, but others don't have that
unusual situation and shouldn't be encouraged to view that as
normal.
Floyd
--
Floyd L. Davidson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pictures of the North Slope at <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
------------------------------
From: Ben Russo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: bash error message
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 13:13:15 -0500
Mike Detlefsen wrote:
> I'm getting an error message when I log into any account that goes:
>
> bash: ecport: command not found
>
> Now, I deduce that in some script I have misspelled 'export' as
> 'ecport'. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how to search for the
> file? I've looked in all the ones I could find, but the little devils
> are hiding all over the place in Linux. Grep doesn't seem to want to
> work on a global scale. Is there anything that does?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Mike D.
>
> --
> Antispam header: Do not reply to this address!
Try this, first thing in the morning (when the system has been idle for
a while)
log in as root, make sure you get the error message above. This will
make sure
that you just accessed whatever file has the typo in it. Then type the
following command.
find / -amin -3 -size -100000c -type f -exec grep --with-filename ecport
{} \;
This will locate all files less than 100000 Bytes of size of type file
(no dir's or links or devices),
and will search for the string "ecport" in each one. If it finds that
string, it will report the file
name and the line of text that contains the string.
for example:
[brusso@laptop /]$ find / -atime -2 -size -10000c -type f -exec grep
--with-filename na.host {} \;
/etc/rpc:hostperf 100107 na.hostperf
/etc/rpc:hostmem 100112 na.hostmem
/etc/rpc:hostif 100117 na.hostif
^C
I got lot's of ---"Permission denied"--- messages because I wasn't logged
in as root,
but you should get the idea from the above output.
-Ben.
------------------------------
From: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.x,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Anti-Linux FUD
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1998 23:57:58 +0000
Reply-To: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Victor Danilchenko
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>Floyd Davidson wrote:
>>
>>
>> You have to link every single executable file. That is
>> indeed one way to accomplish it, and it works well for packages
>> that keep only one or two external entry points. (XEmacs is one
>> example that I like to use.) However, that doesn't work well
>> for netpbm or for X as a couple of examples.
>
> Ummm, that's what "foreach" loops are for.
>
>cd /usr/X11R6/bin
>for i in /opt/kde/bin/*
> do
> ln -s $i
> done
>
> As easy to undo as it is to implement... And even allows you to keep
>record of where everything came from, in case you don't use some package
>management.
>
Or (something I'm thinking of in order to learn scripting :-)
For every /opt/package/bin
For every file in that directory
diff file /opt/bin/file
case file doesn't exist in /opt/bin
create hard link
case files are identical copies
create hard link from /opt/bin overwriting /opt/package/bin
case files are the same file
ignore
endcase
endfor
endfor
for every /opt/bin/file
if linkcount = 1
delete
endif
endfor
That'll hiccup if there are two different files with the same name, but
that'll cause problems anyway :-( It'll also keep the space down if
several apps distribute the same libraries. E.g. StarOffice expects you
to install glibc into /opt/SO50/lib if you have a libc5 system.
But if you run that script every time you install/de-install a package
then you will be able to keep your $PATH short :-)
--
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: Ben Russo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SparcLinux
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 13:14:15 -0500
Frank Hahn wrote:
> On 28 Dec 1998 10:25:38 GMT, Levin Jungermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >I would like to, if somebody knows how to fix this:
> >I am running a SparcIPC (Sun4C) with RedHat 5.1, and if the system is
> >running for more than a few days it almost comes to stand. The problem seems
> >to be 'find', because it occupies about 60% of CPU time.
> >
> I can't answer your question specifically, but did you look at the
> cron files to see if something from there may be running?
>
> --
> Frank Hahn
Do you have any stale HARD mounted NFS file systems?
-Ben.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (joseph_a_philbrook__iii)
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.linux.x,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Is Microsoft a nasty company ? I'm asking you this question.
Date: 28 Dec 1998 18:06:30 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>You seem to be on a MS vendetta. Can we keep it out of the argument?
>
While I think this thread has a lot of good stuff that I'd hate to see get
lost in a blast of gratuitous MS bashing, I think the fact that the subject
line is:
Subject: Re: Is Microsoft a nasty company ? I'm asking you this question.
makes it highly unlikely that we can expect to keep MS vendetta's out of the
argument<g> But lets hope those who like me, harbor very bad feelings for
that particular ""non"" monopoly will at least restrict themselves to
arguments with a point to them, and not reduce this informitive and
entertaining thread to the intelegenge of a TV wresleing match commercial.
--- ___
<O> <-> Joe (theWordy) Philbrook
^
\___/ < [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.linux.x,gnu.misc.discuss,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Is Microsoft a nasty company ? I'm asking you this question.
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 21:39:25 GMT
On 28 Dec 1998 17:00:57 GMT, joseph_a_philbrook__iii
wrote these thought provoking words :
: OK I'll agree that ease of *"_USE_"* will lead to efficiancy... but not that
: easy to learn always leads to either ease of use or efficiancy.
Something can be easy to use but not efficient.
Something can be efficient but not easy to use.
Something can be easy to use and efficient.
All are possibilities and hence "easy to use" and "efficient" are
separate and apart. Both need to be addressed, though mind you, ease
of use often coexists with efficiency. :-)
: AND following this debate I notice that very little is said about the fact that
: the little extras that make a tool easy to learn for one individual may not
: do so for another.
Well, this was deliberate. The fact that appreciation of "ease of use"
or "ease of learning" is purely subjective goes without saying. We
have to guide our application design with respect to ease of use and
learning based on general trends of subjective appreciation and not
dwelling too much on those who are exceptions based on unique needs,
secondary to handicaps or unusual difference in exposure.
Everyone cannot and will never be pleased, but the principles still
stand.
[..]
: >Windows is towards one extreme, Linux is towards the other extreme and
: >making it's way quite quickly to an optimum balance between the two
: >and OS/2 is pretty much, right at the balance already.....how
: >unfortunate it is that such a good OS is doing so badly.<sigh>
:
: I can't speak for OS/2 having that ballance you speak of....
OS/2 has a well developed GUI and CLI which are well integrated
together. Neither is shortchanged so to speak or is lacking in
function. Most PM apps are quite optimised to be used using either
mouse or keyboard and one can often settle down to using a combination
of both if one wishes. The powerful scripting tool, OBject Rexx is
integrated in the OS and many commercial PM apps support it.
This is in contrast to NT which relies basically on a GUI. The CLI
that comes with it is DOS based, and is there as an apology, and
insult to those who appreciate a CLI. It is very limited in function
and integration (unlike OS/2).
I mentioned the fast approaching, and many would in fact say
*arrival*, of linux in this regard, because of the development of
mature window managers for X leading to a powerful, efficient GUI in
association with a fully functional CLI. The best of both worlds.
Everyone can be pleased.
OS/2 has been there in this regard for ages......except for being
OSS.:-)
: , but I'm afraid
: that the prevelance og x only software is draging linux down the path
: toward the extream you attribute to winblows...
I disagree. Linux is simply being developed, as well, to do a much
better job than what windows pretty much botched up (in this regard).
: UNLESS something like incorperating the information on how to use more
: efficiant cli interface commands to accomplish the gui selected task
: is built in to the gui (such as in the ok boxes as I described earlier
: in this thread) is done I'm afraid that linux won't ever achive that
: ballance. And that will sadden me :(
Early days yet! Let's see what happens. Your request would certainly
be the ideal.
: All I know for sure about easy to learn gui stuff is that if they ever
: make it easy for blind users I'll be jealous of their interface...
: only rather than hearing a "spoken" text I'd want a text display so that I
: could see the context.. (it would be easier for me than trying to interpet
: the current idea of easy gui displays)
I see you dislike a GUI. This is unusual trait among non-techies,
which is what most of the world is made up of. :-/ Linux development
is addressing this fact, that's all.
: But if they would build both cli AND gui into ALL new stuff, while using
: well placed and well worded instructions in BOTH interfaces on how to use
: BOTH intertfaces we would have easy to learn software that stayed easy to
: use with expert experiance levals AND would provide easy to relearn seldom
: used tasks for those of us who sometimes forget a detail or two...
Absolutely.
-== Allie ==-
*----------------------*
Allie Martin (Mr.)
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
*---------/*\----------*
------------------------------
From: Ben Russo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help w/mail thru proxy server
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1998 13:21:01 -0500
Jeff Clemmer wrote:
> I have a home network using ethernet/TCP/IP with my linux box acting as
>
> a server with no problems. I finally got the apache proxy server
> working under Linux which allows my Win 98 box to access the internet.
> The problem I have now is I cannot check my mail from the win98 client
> browser through the proxy server. I can't seem to find anything on the
> apache website or linux sites that addresses this.
>
> Any help appreciated!
> Jeff
Try "IP Masquerading" on the linux box. It works great for me.
My roommate and myself now have constant IP access to the internet
from all of our machines at home on a reserved ip subnet 10.10.11.0
through one linux box that dials up our ISP.
-Ben.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
