Linux-Misc Digest #437, Volume #19 Sat, 13 Mar 99 11:13:11 EST
Contents:
Compilation (JG)
Re: RealAudio won't play (Vladymyr Iljyc Lenin)
X-wav Plugin for linux (Jack)
Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing? (wizard)
CDE from linux ("Peter COPPENS")
Re: Disk Boot Failure!! After Install (steve)
Re: Linux Box Hardware (Rod Roark)
Re: Dumb GCC problem (Jim Henderson)
ISDN ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: binary Emacs 20.x for i386? (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Files larger than 2 GB on Intel/Linux (James Youngman)
Re: Staroffice 5.0 install problem (Hermes McFoodPoisoning)
Re: What is the best Linux to install? ("Nexus 6")
Re: so, how is gnome 1.0, guys? <troll> ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Any GOPHER-Users around? (William Cornett)
Re: What is the best Linux to install? ("Mr. Tinkertrain")
Re: What is the best Linux to install? (David Kirkpatrick)
Balsa compile error (Chris Menzel)
Re: More bad news for NT (Harry)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JG)
Subject: Compilation
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 13:14:02 GMT
When I compile a program only one file is generated and placed in
/usr/bin? So, if I want to uninstall the program, may I delete only
this file? And the libraries, is there any problem?
Thanks
================================================
Jes�s Garc�a (Spain)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (remove CUIDADIN to reply)
If bored, visit:
http://members.xoom.com/damanegra
http://www.lanzadera.com/oviedo
================================================
------------------------------
From: Vladymyr Iljyc Lenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,alt.linux,a2000.comp.software.os.linux
Subject: Re: RealAudio won't play
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 13:40:36 +0100
on kernels 2.2.2
if you compile sound as module
you must load module softoss2
--
= lenin =
proste lenin
------------------------------
From: Jack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: X-wav Plugin for linux
Date: 13 Mar 1999 13:28:55 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi
Does anyone know where to get "audio/x-wav" plugins.
Thanks
Jack
------------------------------
From: wizard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing?
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 18:19:36 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christopher Browne wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Mar 1999 22:49:49 GMT, John Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> how about an entire movie? Titanic was done using linux on alphas.
> >> It put out terabytes of data. linux was used to colormatch the
> >> digital images and put together the fames that made up the movie. I
> >> wouldn't consider that usual usage. They needed computing power, they
> >> got alphas
> >
> >They also had money! They were't *too* concerned between $4000 &
> >$10,000...
> >I agree..if you have the money, go for the Alpha... (the 21264 & 21364
> >Alphas look pretty impressive...;-)
>
> It's not so much that they were price-insensitive; it's also that they
> were *space*-sensitive.
>
> Adding a couple of extra boxes to make up for IA-32 CPUs not being as
> fast may not be a big deal when the task is small. Fitting an extra
> system in my apartment might be moderately annoying, but wouldn't cost
> much.
>
> But when you start building a big "rendering farm," additional costs
> start needing to be considered:
> - The cost of the "real estate" required to house the boxes,
> - The cost of getting those boxes dropped into place, plugged in, and
> running.
Funny thing is there are many vendors offering preassembled Alpha farms. Just
drop the rack in place supply power and off you go. This is not the case with
Intel systems, at least I have not seen many advertised. The market for
performance machines is at time very sensitive to pricing considerations, since
many"farms" are Alpha powered there must be a good reason. The only reason one
could reasonable suggest is performance per dollar. Granted there may be
application were an Intel system will accel but the market doesn't seem to
support that theory.
I would also suggest that if you start to wave enough money around, pricing
become less of a concern as vendors will become very flexible to make the sale.
>
>
> Buying Intel-based boxes might *not* be more economical if you have to
> spend an extra million dollars on the land and building to house them...
> --
I really can't concieve of any situation were the size of the box is going to
make an intel sysytem more competitve. If that were so Intel would be seling
more of there super computers to the goverment. This is especially true if you
are chosing competitve systems from both manufactures. Not many intel chipsets
will allow 8MB of cache or large memory systems for that manner.
Dave
>
> Wow! Windows now can do everything using shared library DLLs, just
> like Multics did back in the 1960s! Maybe someday they'll discover
> separate processes and pipes, which came out in the 1970s!
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/alpha.html>
------------------------------
From: "Peter COPPENS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: CDE from linux
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 14:46:02 +0100
Hi,
Is there any detailed HOWTO or other document that explains how I have to
configure a UNIX machine and a Linux box to be able to log on to the UNIX
through Linux and start a CDE-session on the Linux PC?
Thanks for any help!!
Bye,
Peter COPPENS
==============================
Peter COPPENS
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
La Esperanta Komputilfaka Centrejo
http://user.online.be/peco
==============================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Disk Boot Failure!! After Install
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 14:00:27 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 11 Mar 1999 00:14:44 +0000, Cliff
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Need some help from y'all
>
>After installing linux on a 6.4 Gig disk (as the only OS), the install
>goes OK and then at the rebooting stage, it commes up with the ff
>message:
>
>Verifying DMI Pool Data .......
>Not found any [active partition] in HDD
>DISK BOOT FAILURE, INSERT SYSTEM DISK AND PRESS ENTER
>
Use fdsk and set the active partition.
steve
------------------------------
From: Rod Roark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Box Hardware
Date: 13 Mar 1999 13:59:48 GMT
brian moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It's not just the drive, it's the controller. A SCSI controller (and
>drive) have much more intelligence than IDE drives (and 'UDMA' is just a
>fancy name for IDE). This frees the CPU from a lot of the nonsense
>involved in disk IO.
No, UDMA is an improvement of bus master DMA, which (unlike PIO mode
IDE) does free the CPU during disk I/O. For details and links to further
information, see http://metalab.unc.edu/mdw/HOWTO/mini/Ultra-DMA.html.
>My K6-300 comes to a screeching halt when I open large mailboxes in Mutt
>(okay, they're 20-30M) while running rc5des. My SCSI machines don't
>even flinch.
Are you sure Linux is supporing UDMA on your K6-300? If it doesn't
say so at bootup, it's not.
-- Rod
======================================================================
Sunset Systems Preconfigured Linux Computers
http://www.sunsetsystems.com/ and Custom Software
======================================================================
------------------------------
From: Jim Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Dumb GCC problem
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 12:28:46 -0700
Thanks for the pointer, Ray. I normally do look for FAQs, but didn't
this time around for some reason....
Appreciate the help.
Jim
J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
[snipped]
--
Jim Henderson
Novell Support Connection SysOp - http://support.novell.com/forums
Homepage at http://www.bigfoot.com/~jhenderson (email instructions
located here)
Please note that as an NSC SysOp, I do not provide support for Novell
products on a personal basis - if you need help with a Novell product,
please post a reply in the public newsgroup or visit the Novell support
forums at the URL above.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: ISDN
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 14:02:31 GMT
Hi,
Has anyone connect a linux box to a workstation using an ISDN link ? I
want to get two machines talking to each other using PPP on an ISDN link.
Ethernet would be the best option I know, but I can't use it. I've had a
look at the HOWTO's and can't find anything that is of much use.
My main question is how do I setup the link ? How do I get one machine
to "dial" the other ? They will be connect directly to each other in a LAN
config.
Any pointers/info would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Simon.
P.S If possible could you send me a copy of your post directly.
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.emacs
Subject: Re: binary Emacs 20.x for i386?
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 13 Mar 1999 09:22:38 -0500
Tom Roche <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have access to a PC clone running Linux (Redhat 5.2 on i386). It
> seems to work well enough, but it doesn't have Emacs. I saw that
> metalab.unc.edu has binaries of 19.34, but I've grown accustomed to
> running GNU Emacs 20.3.1 on NT. (Plus I wanna run JDE, which works
> much better with 20.x Emacsen.)
> Can anyone recommend where I can get suitable Emacs binaries? If I
> gotta compile I will, but I'm a Linux newb; I'd just as soon pull down
> pre-built and get to work.
turn to your redhat 5.2 cd-rom or favorite redhat mirror site and get
the emacs rpm.
as always you can also download the source and compile
your own.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: James Youngman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Files larger than 2 GB on Intel/Linux
Date: 13 Mar 1999 11:04:21 +0000
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sebastian Schaffert) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Patrick Schemitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Hello,
> >
> > is it possible to enable Linux/386 to deal with files >2 GB?
> >
> AFAIK it is not possible.
>
> But if it helps your mind: Solaris SPARC also isn't able to handle
> files > 2GB. :-(
There are Large-File patches available for the Linux kernel that
provide open64(), etc.
--
ACTUALLY reachable as @free-lunch.demon.(whitehouse)co.uk:james+usenet
------------------------------
From: Hermes McFoodPoisoning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Staroffice 5.0 install problem
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 1999 01:32:06 +1030
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Christopher R. Dorr regurgitated:
> I don't have time to play these stupid games with Star. Their nonsense cost
> them at least a few desktop sales, and perhaps 100+. Crap like this doesn't
> play in corporate America.
>
> Chris
I have just purchased SuSE 6.0 and had no problems whatsoever installing
StarOffice5.0
I presume you people were reading the instructions as you installed? (ie
that staroffice5 didn't install as an rpm and so as root you had to
enter X and issue the command 'sosetup')
As far as registration, I fired up staroffice and browsed on over to
their site and when I entered my personal Mediakey from my registration
card, it automatically installed the registration key :)
Perhaps we just get a better deal here in Australia... or we're able to
read the instructions :P
--
It is something to be able to paint a particular picture, or to carve a
statue, and so to make a few objects beautiful; but it is far more
glorious to carve and paint the very atmosphere and medium through
which we look, which morally we can do. To affect the quality of the
day, that is the highest of arts.
-- Henry David Thoreau, "Where I Live"
------------------------------
From: "Nexus 6" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: What is the best Linux to install?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:10:11 -0800
redhat-fully automated
slackware-for do it yourselfers
suse-havent used, but good cde i hear
caldera-aol of linux i hear
linux.org has a list of them
Richard wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I am trying to install the newest and the best linux on
>100+ workstation. What would be the best one to choose
>in terms of standard, support, and setup?
>
>Any ideas would be appreciated.
>
>email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Thanks in advance
>Richard
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: so, how is gnome 1.0, guys? <troll>
Date: 13 Mar 1999 15:23:19 GMT
In his obvious haste, steve mcadams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled thusly:
: [Posted & mailed, snipped, quoted is ">"]
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne) wrote:
:>I've not checked the RAM consumption from GNOME proper, as opposed to E;
:>E is *definitely* huge.
: Is "E" the new inspeak for KDE,
"E" is Enlightenment....
--
______________________________________________________________________________
|[EMAIL PROTECTED]| "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
| Andrew Halliwell | |
| Finalist in:- | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
| Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
==============================================================================
|GCv3.12 GCS>$ d-(dpu) s+/- a C++ US++ P L/L+ E-- W+ N++ o+ K PS+ w-- M+/++ |
|PS+++ PE- Y t+ 5++ X+/X++ R+ tv+ b+ DI+ D+ G e>e++ h/h+ !r!| Space for hire |
==============================================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (William Cornett)
Subject: Re: Any GOPHER-Users around?
Date: 13 Mar 1999 05:10:08 GMT
On 13 Mar 1999 02:21:28 +0100, Ralph Baumfalk wrote:
: Hi all,
: is someone still using the old but nice Gopher-system?
: Ralph
:
I liked gopher because it was fast and functional across a dial-up line.
Gopher sites are hard to find now, most Internet users don't even know
what you're talking about. The World-Wide-Wait has taken over in the
name of progress. Function has passed in favor of entertainment and
art, intended to draw the TV couch potatos away from the boob tube.
Let's face it, most people abhor plain text. That's why gopher died.
--
Remove the period from my email address to reply.
------------------------------
From: "Mr. Tinkertrain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What is the best Linux to install?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:52:31 -0500
i wonder if he realizes that he might start another war about which
linux distribution is the best
------------------------------
From: David Kirkpatrick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.networking,alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: What is the best Linux to install?
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:48:13 +0000
For under the hood probably any version would do for a workstation so
kernel consideration is any.
Other big points would be user interface. Each comes with different
window managers installed and extra support scripts to fire up and
manage them. For example RH has some nice scripts for 4 window managers
and excells in setting up fvwm but NO kde. So depending on what you
want to make available to your people would be a factor. Then again it
may not make much of a difference as you will probably be making a cd or
a master disk and in that case a specific release is not important. You
would cook up what you want taking the better features from each release
and make a CD/disk for download machines.
If you really are going to do this out of the box on individual
machines then RH is the only choice. Install is clean, support
available and most important is there are of users getting those errors
and weak spots found out so trip points are discovered/known and you can
find out about them in news. You will probably not have a problem that
not been mentioned in new several times before it happens to you. I
would bet that you could get most any support question answered by
searching the news days faster than you will get through RH support but
the others do not have "support".
From personal experience I would eliminate KDE and Gnome from a list
of options to install. KDE has too many problems and with a 100 users
you'd be 100% devoted to complaints about X freezes or cpu usage high
with only a few process running or memory problems etc. I use it here
as my main WM but I live with its shortcommings but average users will
be screaming with complaints. You'll probably have to experiment and
see what you user population wants to live with for a WM which will
dictate a bit of what your setup will require. But thats only a portion
and about all I can add other than some comments on the admin tools.
You preferences here will make a difference. There are several text
tools for admin'ing and semi-gui's and GUI's. You'll probably have to
seek them out and use them to see what you like etc et include it in a
build list if your burning a CD or see which releases encorporate the
most if the things you find desireable.
d
Richard wrote:
>
> I am trying to install the newest and the best linux on
> 100+ workstation. What would be the best one to choose
> in terms of standard, support, and setup?
>
> Any ideas would be appreciated.
>
> email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Thanks in advance
> Richard
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Menzel)
Subject: Balsa compile error
Date: 13 Mar 1999 08:52:56 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm getting the following error when compiling balsa 0.4.6.2:
main-window.c:121: structure has no member named `toolbar'
I have all the libs and devel libs installed for Gnome 1.0, including in
particular all such required by balsa. libPropList-0.8.3 is also
installed.
Any help appreciated.
Chris Menzel
------------------------------
From: Harry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 1999 10:43:23 -0500
Arthur Corliss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The UI interface *is* having an impact on the system,
> primarily in wasted memory, even more so, since much of
> *can't* be paged outm
The user interface, be it Explorer or whichever UI you choose,
isn't loaded when no-on is logged on. Given that just about e
every NT administrative tool, inlcuding User Manager, Server ,
Manager, WINS Manager, DNS Manager, DHCP Manager, SQL Server's
Enterprise Manager, the Registry Editor, and Performance v
Monitor, all allow remote adminstration, even via a dial-up '
connection, you can easily log on to a machine that isn't being
used interactively and check which processes are running. bExplorer w
Explorer won't be one. That's the UI. So it won't be using its
4.5 MB of memory.
What NT doesn't have is a remote console.i
If you want to criticise NT, first learn about it.b
Harryu
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
