Linux-Misc Digest #653, Volume #18 Sun, 17 Jan 99 04:13:09 EST
Contents:
Re: Newbie Needs Linux Help ... (brian moore)
Re: Real Time Linux ("Norm Dresner")
Linux with 256Mb? ("F. Javier Heredia")
Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND idiot-friendly?
(root)
Re: Getting an ICQ Client Under Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Problems with 'make' (macks)
Re: things I'd pay to have developed for Linux... (Peter Samuelson)
Re: Multi booting ("Mal Thomas")
Re: playmidi and SB16 ? (G�rard Milmeister)
Re: Sound Editing on Linux (G�rard Milmeister)
RH 5.2 gcc and ld problems (Jesse Jensen)
Re: searching for lex (Frank Hale)
Re: What dev? RedHat 5.2 or SlackWare 3.6? (John Strange)
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Newbie Needs Linux Help ...
Date: 17 Jan 1999 07:51:51 GMT
On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 23:41:02 -0700,
King Nothing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I saw this subject line that says this and that and then I read this....
>
> Just remember one thing, you just admitted to the world that you "have
> never paid for a microsoft product". If a microsoft employee were to get
> pissed by this (and no I am not one) you end up paying more that what you
> would have spent buying those Microsoft products and may even go to jail
> for some time.
Hey, I've never paid for a Microsoft product. Not a damned thing they
can do about it either. (Ah, the joys of evading Messy-DOS and then
Windows. :))
--
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: "Norm Dresner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Real Time Linux
Date: 15 Jan 1999 21:48:20 GMT
The home page for Real-Time Linux is at
http://rtlinux.cs.nmt.edu/~rtlinux/homepage_noframes.shtml
At the present time, it's a hacker's paradise, but there's nothing there
for the average user. Installation, while not difficult, adds no
functionality to Linux until you write your own programs. Nevertheless, it
does work
Norm
C.R.Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Hi,
> Can anyone tell me what the status of Real Time Linux is?
> Is it available from someone like Red Hat?
> I need to draw some comparisons (for and against) between RT Linux and
> other RT OS's like VXWorks......has anyone any thoughts?
>
> Thanks
>
> Chris Anderson
>
>
------------------------------
From: "F. Javier Heredia" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux with 256Mb?
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 11:07:40 +0100
==============BB48829A447FA301C612CDA1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi to all.
I use Slackware 3.2, kernel 2.0.19 (I think!), in a P166 with
a TX motherboard. Recently I upgrade the memory up to 256Mb
(2*168Mb DIMM) , but, looking at the information prompted by
the "top" command, it seems that Linux only recognizes 64Mb,
which was the amount of memory before the upgrade (I did previously
an upgrade from 32MB to 64Mb without any problem). So, two
questions arise:
1) Are really Linux able to support the 256Mb? (I asked this question
previously in the NG and somebody answered that it can handle up
to 1Gb).
2) Must I do something special to make Linux recognize the
256Mb installed?
TIA
Javier
--
................................................................
F. Javier Heredia :
Statistics and Op. Research Dept. : e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Univ. Politecnica de Catalunya : phone. : +34-3-401-73-35
FME. Edifici U, Campus Sud : FAX : +34-3-401-58-55
c. Pau Gargallo 5, :
08071 Barcelona. Spain :
................................................................
==============BB48829A447FA301C612CDA1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<HTML>
<TT>Hi to all.</TT><TT></TT>
<P><TT>I use Slackware 3.2, kernel 2.0.19 (I think!), in a P166 with</TT>
<BR><TT>a TX motherboard. Recently I upgrade the memory up to 256Mb</TT>
<BR><TT>(2*168Mb DIMM) , but, looking at the information prompted by</TT>
<BR><TT>the "top" command, it seems that Linux only recognizes 64Mb,</TT>
<BR><TT>which was the amount of memory before the upgrade (I did previously</TT>
<BR><TT>an upgrade from 32MB to 64Mb without any problem). So, two</TT>
<BR><TT>questions arise:</TT><TT></TT>
<P><TT>1) Are really Linux able to support the 256Mb? (I asked this question</TT>
<BR><TT> previously in the NG and somebody answered that it
can handle up</TT>
<BR><TT> to 1Gb).</TT>
<BR><TT>2) Must I do something special to make Linux recognize the</TT>
<BR><TT> 256Mb installed?</TT><TT></TT>
<P><TT>TIA</TT><TT></TT>
<P><TT>Javier</TT><TT></TT>
<P><TT>--</TT>
<BR><TT>................................................................</TT>
<BR><TT> F. Javier
Heredia
:</TT>
<BR><TT> Statistics and Op. Research Dept. : e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED]</TT>
<BR><TT> Univ. Politecnica de Catalunya : phone.
: +34-3-401-73-35</TT>
<BR><TT> FME. Edifici U, Campus Sud
: FAX : +34-3-401-58-55</TT>
<BR><TT> c. Pau Gargallo
5,
:</TT>
<BR><TT> 08071 Barcelona.
Spain
:</TT>
<BR><TT>................................................................</TT>
<BR><TT></TT> </HTML>
==============BB48829A447FA301C612CDA1==
------------------------------
From: root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.powerpc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: This is Linux, not Windows, so why not superior flexibility AND
idiot-friendly?
Date: 16 Jan 1999 00:34:27 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (MalkContent) writes:
Don't forget that Linux is not *JUST* another os. It's not DOS, not
Windoze,
not MacOS, not OS/2. It's a UNIX clone.
The difficulty in learning to use linux is due to your lack of
knowledge
on UNIX. Believe me there are people you have been using (unix) machines the
past decade and have more trouble learning windoze than other i386 Unix
clones, for instance.
Most of the Linux people (especially those who don't have experience
with
other unices) tend to think it's just an alternative, very stable O/S. The fact
is that Linux - and Free / Net / Open BSD, and Solaris, and ... too - is
indeed stable, because it has been built on the Unix architecture which in
turn has been developing and maturing for almost 25 years now.
Because of the unbreakable link of Linux and the Unix environment,
no matter how simple the OS installation maybe, one must try to learn
the way it works in order to use it effectively.
Even if we had an X-Environment full of little programs doing
everything
(such as mounting and unmounting the cdrom), there would be plenty of cases
where we would be left stuck without being able to do anything. The same thing
happens to windows users who haven't searched the trickier aspects of Windows
administration (the control panel for example).
Those people tend to be happy users for 90% of the time they use
their computer, however when hell breaks lose (which has happened at least
one time to every windoze user, let me assure you) one must be quite
proficient with the old DOS ways as well as other not so user-friendly
methods (Safe mode for example). On those cases, as another guy in this thread
pointed out, those people call their IS senior who does the hard work.
In any case, the effort to make Linux more user friendly must
continue. However, as long as operating systems get more and more
complex and powerful, there will be more effort required from the part
of either the user or the administrator in order to maintain the system.
==============================
p94003@rainbow.**NOSPAM**.cs.unipi.gr
remove **NOSPAM** to reply !!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Getting an ICQ Client Under Linux
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 13:06:16 GMT
I couldn't get the rpm to install:
failed dependencies:
libjpeg.so.62 is needed by licq-0.50-alpha-1-1
I tried installing libjpeg-6b-2.i386.rpm but it didn't fix the problem.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Greer) wrote:
> Use licq......you should be able to find an RPM on the redhat ftp
> site. It will install very painlessly (is that a word?).
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (macks)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: Re: Problems with 'make'
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 06:38:20 GMT
Try to cd to /usr/src/linux. That might help, I always use make
menuconfig, it's much cleaner. :)
macks
On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 04:10:35 +0000, "Douglas A. Haines"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi folks,
>I'm trying to get network support running on my Linux box (kernel
>2.0.34) and when I run 'make config' I get the following cryptic (and
>frustrating)
>message:
> make: *** No rule to make target 'config'.
>Stop.
>
>Does anyone know what the heck this means and how I can fix it? I'd
>really like to get this network up and running. Thanks in advance.
>
>Doug Haines
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Samuelson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: things I'd pay to have developed for Linux...
Date: 16 Jan 1999 07:36:04 -0600
Reply-To: Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>]
> I'd like to see a filesystem that let your logical mount point be a
> read/write overlay of a read-only mount, possibly NFS or CDROM.
I saw a patch for this once. Don't remember what it was called, maybe
ovlfs or something. Look around places like linuxmama. I don't
remember if it was a generic VFS thing or if it was specific to CDROMs
(or isofs, to be exact) since that is what it was designed for.
--
Peter Samuelson
<sampo.creighton.edu!psamuels>
------------------------------
From: "Mal Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.misc
Subject: Re: Multi booting
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 21:39:00 +0800
Dunno about NT but I just went through the exact same exercise with 2
copies of Win95 and Linux (Redhat 5.0).
1. I used Partition Magic to resize my 2 Win95 partitions to give me about
250 mb free space on the drive. So after this process I had two Win95
partitions, a freespace of 250mb and the BootManager partition of 2mb.
2. Don't format this free space in anyway.
3. Proceed with the install as per LINUX install instructions. Linux will
install the Native and Swap partitions into the free space you had left on
your drive.
4. Continue as per the Linux install process . When you get to the part
where you need to install LILO, choose the MBR or Master Boot Record of
your harddrive, NOT the 'First sector of the Boot partition'. I tried this
and it didn't work as described in the manual. Why ? I don't know.
Installing LILO into the MBR did work.
The LINUX install process then asks you for the name of the other partitions
that you want to add to the LILO 'menu'. You can also add the BootManager
partition to LILO.
When you boot your machine LINUX/LILO will boot and give you a prompt
LILO:
If you then hit the TAB key you should see a line that looks like this:
LILO: linux Win95 (or whatever you called your partitions
in step 4 above)
just type the name of the OS you want to boot.
Mine looks like this: LILO: linux Win95 Win95Office2000 BootManager
.
So if I want to boot Windows 95 I type Win95 and hit enter, Windows 95
then boots. If you want to boot to linux just type linux or wait 30 secs or
so, linux seems to be the default (on my machine anyway). If I type
BootManager at the LILO prompt, BootManager boots and give you the familiar
blue menu containing the OS's defined in the primary partitions as before.
LINUX will not be on it tho. I tried this before too, but LINUX, as far
as DOS and Partition Magic is concerned is installed into a DOS extended
partition which you can't add to the BootManager menu.
NOW THIS IS THE PROCESS USING REDHAT LINUX 5.0 FROM THE 'TEACH YOURSELF
LINUX IN 24 HOURS BOOK' FROM SAMS PUBLISHING.
You may need to adapt your actual installation process to suit the flavour
of the LINUX you are installing.
Anyway I hope it helps some.
Cheers
Mal (another LINUX newbie)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (G�rard Milmeister)
Subject: Re: playmidi and SB16 ?
Date: 16 Jan 1999 13:24:28 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 15 Jan 1999 12:29:01 GMT, Cliff Bradshaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I've just compiled up 'playmidi' for Linux and *cannot*
>get it to play midi files through the FM synth on my
>soundcard! As far as I know, the sound drivers are correctly
>compiled into the kernel, all the IRQ and DMA settings are
>correct. I've tried fiddling with the 'playmidi.h' file
>and tried all the command line options. And I get zip,
>nada, nothing!
Maybe you should use timidity. Playing midi through FM is really
horribly quality.
--
G�rard Milmeister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tannenrauchstrasse 35
8038 Z�rich
Switzerland
+41 1 481 52 48
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (G�rard Milmeister)
Subject: Re: Sound Editing on Linux
Date: 16 Jan 1999 13:24:29 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 13 Jan 1999 22:57:21 +0100, Lars Preben S. Arnesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I need a real good sound editor for Linux.
>Is there a Linux sound editor that is like Cool Edit Pro for Windows
>or is there no alternative to Windoze world?
>
>--
> Lars Preben
Two excellent sound editors are snd (on sunsite) and MixViews. You
could also try DAP (Digital Audio Processor).
--
G�rard Milmeister <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Tannenrauchstrasse 35
8038 Z�rich
Switzerland
+41 1 481 52 48
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
From: Jesse Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RH 5.2 gcc and ld problems
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 1999 08:18:50 GMT
I'm having major problems upgrading and installing software on my Redhat
5.2 computer. Everything craps out when I try to compile it.
At first I was getting a missing "crt1.o" error, but I was able to find
all the crt* stuff (I wonder why it wasn't there to begin with).
Then, gcc started crapping out when it got a "-02" flag. As I
understand it, this is a very important and popular optimization flag,
so I don't know why that didn't work. I RPMed in a new gcc, and that
problem went away.
Now, ld doesn't work. It always says it can't find file "-lc". I guess
"-lc" is an important flag that ld is mistaking for the name of a file.
So, I tried installing egcs and making gcc point to it. ld does the
same thing. I tried reinstalling ld, to no avail. I don't know where
to find a different version of ld or a different linker to try.
I'd like to be able to compile stuff because not everything comes in
binary form and I need to change the defaults of some programs.
These are the programs I'm trying to install:
wu-ftpd-2.4.2-beta-18-vr12
binutils-2.9.1.0.19a
fileutils-3.16
xferstats
What is a poor linux newbie to do? I used to have an older Debian
distribution, and things seemed to install much more smoothly. I liked
that.
Thank you for your time and help in this matter.
Jesse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Frank Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: searching for lex
Date: 17 Jan 1999 08:28:24 GMT
Brassel Claude wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have a standart SuSE 5.3 installation, and I need "lex". Where can I
> find it ? Is it a standart package ?
>
> Please Help !!!!
Do you have the SuSE cd's? It should be on there. Look for Flex (lex)
and Bison (yacc).
--
From: Frank Hale
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ: 7205161
Homepage: http://members.xoom.com/frankhale/
Jade: http://jade.netpedia.net/
"Excuse my english I went to a US public school"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Strange)
Subject: Re: What dev? RedHat 5.2 or SlackWare 3.6?
Date: 16 Jan 1999 13:30:46 GMT
goto http://cart.cheapbytes.com/cgi-bin/cart
spend $2 for each + shipping and try them both.
You might look under bundles (SAVE) for more.
Steven ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I am not sure what linux dev I should get next. RedHat or Slackware? I am
: looking for a nice and easy simple to configure dev that is really stable
: and fast.
: Please help me, thanx
--
While Alcatel may claim ownership of all my ideas (on or off the job),
Alcatel does not claim any responsibility for them. Warranty expired when u
opened this article and I will not be responsible for its contents or use.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class.
Date: 16 Jan 1999 23:38:32 -0800
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Arthur says...
>
>
>If you can tolerate it, then obviously you don't have a problem
>and you have no reason to switch. But don't pretend Windows is a
>reliable system.
>
Holy cow !!!
Where did I never pretended that windows is more reliable??????
I never said anything like that.
The ones who do all the pretending are the Unix/Linux people. when they
pretend that Linux is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
I am saying Windows with all its faults is BETTER for HOME USERS than 100
unix combined.
home users (the MAJORITY of the people in the world are home users), do
not care a doodle doo about their PC crashing once a while, and they
dont care about a system staying up years and years online. They care
about ease of use, plenty of good applications, and as little hastle as
possible. non of which Unix is good at.
>
>Once again, there probably isn't a reason for those people to
>switch. It's doubtful that many of those people would even follow
>this NG closely.
>
People are NOT switching. Home User are NOT switching. some commerical
companies are. and I have no problem with that. since in commerical
companies people are paid money to know things and to know how to handle
the computer. for your informations, at work I use Unix more than windows,
and have always did. and I prefer to use UNIX any day of the time before
any other system. it all depends on what hat I am wearing. I am not blinded
like you by one OS.
>
>And Windows reliability won't improve unless people complain
>about or switch in significant numbers to other products. I've
>struggled with MS products since the early 80's (although I did
>use DR-DOS for a while, which I found to be much better pre Win3.1)
>and I'm just happy to have MS and it's marketing smokescreen out
>of my life.
>
Home user do not need more reliablity. period. they need ease of use.
BOB
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
