Linux-Misc Digest #117, Volume #19 Sat, 20 Feb 99 20:13:09 EST
Contents:
Re: Web based Telnet client? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Help with X related concepts. (Matthias Warkus)
Canon BJ-10EX in epson mode... (Sam Vere)
IP addresses of PC under same network how to get? ("John+@newbie@+Wong")
X server for Windows NT ("Theo van der Merwe")
linux sucks, windows is cool, lets get a million posts to my juvenile arguments
!!!! ("JACK")
Please help! Xfree86 (Mark Cardwell)
Re: Firewall with 1 IP (Jason Clifford)
Re: Putting NT (and Linux) on the Same System? (Jason Clifford)
Re: How to low-level format a harddrive ("Norm Dresner")
Re: Inito 9100A SCSI CARD COMPILING PROBLEMS (Jose Urena)
Re: GCC x EGCS (Floyd Davidson)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (John S. Dyson)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (John S. Dyson)
Re: Mail client for Linux (Shaun Lipscombe)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (John S. Dyson)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (John S. Dyson)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Matt Dillon)
Re: Run video clips (Cameron Fraser)
Re: KDE? Gnome? ... confused (Paul Taylor)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: Web based Telnet client?
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 21:25:14 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:07:42 -0800...
..and Rob Dover <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is the problem. I am on one side of a firewall (which I have no control
> over) that does not allow any telnet sessions to cross over. I administer a
> Linux box that lives outside the firewall. It has both Telnet clients and an
> Apache Web server running. I would like to link those 2 functions together
> so that I can access the Telnet client through the web. If possible I would
> like to be able to both administer the Linux box as well as use it to telnet
> out to other machines.
> Has this been done? Is it even possible?
There is a MUD Web site somewhere which includes a Java telnet client
to play MUDs right off the site. Perhaps you can find that client
somehow.
mawa
--
Troll, troll, troll your post
Gently down the feed
Merrily, merrily troll along
A life is what you need...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.questions,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Help with X related concepts.
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 21:10:46 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Wed, 17 Feb 1999 11:20:35 -0600...
..and Greg Thorne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > E: _REALLY_ configurable. Its main aim is to be totally configurable. It
> > can be a real memory and CPU hog because of the way it draws the window
> > decorations. But, of course, this can me reduced by playing with the
> > config. Also, since Rasterman (it's original author) now works at RHAD
> > labs, it is always going to be the most GNOME-compliant WM.
> Okay, that's kind of what I gathered so far. It sounds really cool, but
> I've heard it's kind of difficult to install and configure. I've also
> heard that some people have trouble with it crashing. I'm going to be
> running a K6-3 300 with 64M of RAM. Should I have a problem?
It runs slightly sub-optimal on a Pentium 133 with 16 MB of RAM. On
your machine it should be a dream.
> > WindowMaker: This is pretty popular. It's a nice-looking WM that can be
> > customized a fair bit, but is still pretty damn lean. I believe it's now
> > the official WM of the GNUStep project, so it looks alot like the original
> > NeXTStep. Fun things like a docking bar and dockable applets.
> The docking bar and dockable applets are useable in E also, are they not?
I'm not sure what you mean. Perhaps, yes, but I don't know whether
they'll interface correctly with the WM.
[schnibble]
> Hehehe. Yah, I've noticed that there are quite a few KDE zealots out
> there. I don't know about that one. The idea of the apps being all
> glued together and built in isn't that appealing to me.
KDE isn't too monolithic... people just say it is. Nevertheless, I've
come to like Gnome better :).
> > > 2) Is there a way to switch WM's while you're in your X session?
> > Yes, many WM's suport this. It does has to be supported by the WM though.
> Okay, so each window manager you want to switch to has to support it?
Only the one you want to switch from.
> > > 3) What exactly is GNOME? I know it's not really a separate WM,
> > GNOME is a desktop environment. It was originally started in reaction to
> > the licence for the QT widget set used by KDE. It has since started
> > moving off in a slightly different direction to KDE. It looks like GNOME
> > might end up being more of a 'hacker' or 'power user' desktop, or at least
> > to begin with.
> >
> > Enlightenment is the de-facto GNOME window manager, but pretty much any WM
> > can be used. WindowMaker and FVWM2 are probably the best alternatives.
> So GNOME is a set of desktop apps, and API's that the applications can
> talk to, or what?
You guessed it. It comes with a CORBA ORB, too. The Gnome panel is
a real dream, BTW.
> > > but it still will run GTK themes? How does this work?
> > I'm not sure what you mean here.
> >
> > GTK is a widget set, and dictates how the 'widgets' look. i.e buttons,
> > menus, lists, etc... The current development version of GTK has support
> > for themes, also done by Rasterman. This is totally seperate to the WM.
> Yah, I was talking about the themes on http://gtk.themes.org . Are they
> WM-independent as long as you're running GNOME, or what? I know most (if
> not all) WM's are themeable by themselves, but how does GTK themes apply
> to the WM?
They're totally unrelated to Gnome. They'll work with every GTK
application. If the WM uses GTK, well, good for it.
> > > 4) I know this is objective, but give me your opinions: which WM's are
> > > superior in resource usage, graphical look, and "feel"?
> > I'm using enlightenment at home on my K6-2 300 with 128M of ram. I run
> > X at 1440x1080 @32bpp (8M Millenium G200 with a nice 17" mitsubishi
> > monitor!) and have 12 desktops, with 8 different 'wallpapers' at the
> > moment. I can't remember how much it takes up, but the X server process
> > usually swells to over 70M to cache all of the wallpapers.
> So, you're running 1440x1080 on a 17" monitor? You mean you're not blind
> yet? Wow. 70M is quite a hog. I guess you have 128M, so why not.
You don't really need the X server to be that big - tiled backgrounds
are nice, too :).
[schnibble]
> > The 'Eterm' program (an X terminal modelled after enlightenments'
> > configurability) does have the ability to be transparent.
> Is this the only terminal that allows this? I was looking at the
> AfterStep theme called "Translucency" on this page:
> http://as.themes.org/themes.shtml
> Here is the screen shot: http://as.themes.org/shots/Translunacy.jpg
>
> Is this something that the WM allowed the designer to do, or what?
It's a theme that uses partly transparent pixmaps, or either the X
SHAPE extension to make "holes" in windows. Whatever the case, it's
not really the window which is transparent.
mawa
--
CO2 | >< - FUEL HERE | | LS-L ------' ROYAL +-------+
+------+--+ | +----+ SPACE | DON'T |
| CAUTION | HARD ,--------' | DANGER: NAVY | STEP |
+---------+ POINT B| SIG-29-42 | NNTP C/1897 +-------+
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam Vere)
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Canon BJ-10EX in epson mode...
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 23:34:12 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Funny thing.
When trying to print a specific, saved postscript file (The refcard
for Emacs if you must know), with the printer in Epson emulation mode,
the printer will beep two or three times, print two question marks at
the top of the page, then page-feed the paper out. It will repeat this
two or three times, then start printing normally.
Its almost as if extra 'data' is being transmitted at the beginning of
the file sent to the queue, that the printer doesn't understand.
I'm currently using the 'epson' ghostscript driver. Are any of the
others any better? (I understand that the epson mode on this printer
is a LQ)
(In BJ-10e mode there is a strong tendancy towards garbage at the
beginning of the print.
<-------------------REMOVE SPAMTO TO DIRECT REPLY------------------->
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | THERE IS NO TERIYAKI, ONLY ZUUL!
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | - Akane's cooking,
| The Varaiyah Cycle
------------------------------
From: "John+@newbie@+Wong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux
Subject: IP addresses of PC under same network how to get?
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 03:18:39 +0800
Dear Linux World,
I'm now trying to get files from my MS neighbouring PCs on my linux
box. Somebody suggested smbclient for me this newbie... but how to get
the IP of the PCs on the network?
What can I use? What should I do?
Thank you for any suggestion and help.....
Best Regards
John
------------------------------
From: "Theo van der Merwe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: X server for Windows NT
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 23:43:54 +0200
Where can I find a good X server for Windows NT?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Best regards,
Theo ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
From: "JACK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: linux sucks, windows is cool, lets get a million posts to my juvenile
arguments !!!!
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 23:44:55 -0000
howdy
why is it that when someone posts a rediculous argument as to why
windows is great and linux is crap. that there is a million posts in reply.
this is a linux users group. the people here use linux, like linux, have
tech problems with linux, and need an answers. the people in this group do
not need to know linux is great, because you are preaching to the converted.
Nor do they need to know that windows is crap again they do not use windows.
Or ultimately they have a enough sense the judge each on its merits.
if you think you are defending linux by replying to infalmentry
agruments your not. your degrading the quality of the news group, wasting
band width and ultimately making linux users out to be naive zealots or
pretentious idiots. post of this sort should not be replied to they waste
everyones time. if they must be replied to the the maintainers of
comp.os.linux.misc should compile a standard answer and leave it at that.
sorry to be preachy but when you pay 3p per min to connect to the
internet its a pain in the arse to have to download this troll!
j
------------------------------
From: Mark Cardwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Please help! Xfree86
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 19:00:32 -0500
I have been using DOS up to Windows 98 for 4 years and finally decided I
had to try Linux. My local computer store had Red Hat 5.2, so I got
that and installed it today. I have it dual booting between Linux and
Win 98.
I have the Diamond Monster Fusion Banshee graphics card. I installed
the SVGA server and selected Unlisted card and then selected my
monitor. Ok, when I enter 'startx' it goes to a blank screen for a
fraction of a second, and then brings me back to the prompt. It says
"No screen found" in the error message.
Any idea what's going on?
I'm new to Linux and this is my first day, so if this is a stupid
question, sorry!
_________________Mark Cardwell__________________
THE CELERON OVERCLOCKING GUIDE
Version 2.1 - Check it Out!
http://www.ultranetwork.net/celeron/index.shtml
________________________________________________
------------------------------
From: Jason Clifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Firewall with 1 IP
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 22:06:17 +0000
On Sat, 20 Feb 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> - My ISP has asigned me 1 static IP.
> - I have a LAN, and 3 NT Web servers on it that I want to make available to
> Inet with 192.168.X.X IPs.
>
> - I want to put a Linux RedHat 5.2 based firewall before the LAN.
>
> Would it be possible with just 1 IP, maybe with IP Masquerading or should I
> ask for a Class C Network?
Yes this is possible. I suggest that you read the firewall and
masquerading HOWTO documents that came with your Red Hat distribution.
Jason Clifford
Definite Linux Systems
http://definite.ukpost.com/
------------------------------
From: Jason Clifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Putting NT (and Linux) on the Same System?
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 1999 22:09:44 +0000
On Sat, 20 Feb 1999, Wayne Watson wrote:
> Well, OK, I'll be expressive. :-) Is there some description somewhere of how this
>might be done, say in a
> book, by a distributor of Linux, or the Linux Journal?
You need only install Linux specifying the second hard disk for the Linux
partitions during installation and then use whatever boot manager you
perfer - LILO,WinNT boot manager, the one from Partition Magic etc - to
permit selection of the OS at boot up time.
I am not best suited to judge whether a particular book covers this well
as I would be reading the book from the wrong perspective - I already know
how to do this and thus any assumpions the author makes could go
undetected.
Jason Clifford
Definite Linux Systems
http://definite.ukpost.com/
------------------------------
From: "Norm Dresner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: How to low-level format a harddrive
Date: 21 Feb 1999 00:00:50 GMT
Torsten Jenkner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in article
<7an32r$35r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> with modern harddrives it is impossible to low-level format them. If you
do
> so, you would destroy the drive completely. The question is what problems
> you have exactly. Are there any problems on hardware? Are there any
tracks
> unreadable and/or not writeable? give us more information.
>
> Torsten Jenkner
>
Most hard drive manufacturers have downloadable utilities that include
low-level formatters. Search the www for your HD's manufacturer.
But Torsten asked a very valid question. What are you trying to
accomplish?
Norm
------------------------------
From: Jose Urena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Inito 9100A SCSI CARD COMPILING PROBLEMS
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 14:30:43 -0500
Guessing that you have a PCI or AGP card
Are you sharing IRQs with your video card?
what video card do you have?
Alan Fried wrote:
> I have successfully compiled a new kernel with the Inito drivers
> installed. My card is connected to a Syjet. At boot up all the
> Inito drivers come up including my Syjet.
>
> However when I start xwindows the system crashes. This does not
> happen on the other kernel.
>
> I am using Red Hat 5.1 with kernel 2.0.34 on a 300mhz machinge
> with a 19 inch monitor.
>
> Does anyone have any suggestions and/or solutions??
>
> Thanx in advance
>
> P.S. I have already contacted Initio and they have been of very
> little help. They told me that there was something wrong with my
> Xconfiguration but thats not the problem because xwindows works
> fine with the other kernel minus the Inito drivers. The intio drivers
> have to be doing something to cause this problem.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Floyd Davidson)
Subject: Re: GCC x EGCS
Date: 19 Feb 1999 18:36:30 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Philip Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Floyd Davidson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Bill Simpson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> If you have 2.0.x kernel you should use GCC to compiling kernel and EGCS to
>>>> compiling programs.
>>>How do you find out what kernel you have? Thanks!
>>
>>Run "uname -a" to see.
>>
>>However, there is no reason not to use EGCS to compile a 2.0.x
>>kernel. It requires application of a simple patch to the source
>>code tree and thats it.
>>
>
>Nooo...absolutely not. You do this at your own risk. 2.0.x kernels
>are *not* guarenteed to work when compiled by egcs. You might
>get lucky, in which case fine, but don't use an egcs compiled
>2.0.x kernel in a production machine...
Oh shudder the thought, *at your own risk* !!!!
How does that differ from running a 2.0.x kernel compiled with gcc,
which is also at your own risk. I don't recall any guarantee coming
with any variation of a Linux kernel yet.
Lots of people are indeed compiling 2.0.x kernels using egcs, and
that is not significantly different than, for example, running a 2.1.x
kernel. It is more experimental that other approaches, true enough.
So is any variation for some standard distribution too, and thousands
do that daily.
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] (John S. Dyson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 19 Feb 1999 19:54:41 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jason Clifford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 18 Feb 1999, Robert S. Sciuk wrote:
>
>> With all due respect to yourself, the Linux zealots, GNU lovers the world
>> over and anyone else who might be offended by what I'm about to say, the
>> GPL _is_ pretty restrictive to people who might actually be trying to make
>> a living at software development.
>
> Only for those who want to make a living off of other people's work. There
> is nothing to stop you writing a proprietary application to run on a GPL
> platform so long as you do not integrate someone else's work that is
> GPL'd.
>
What is wrong with "making a living?" I find it to be very laudable
that people are contributing to the free software base and making
it easier to produce creative works. BTW, don't CDROM vendors, and
Red Hat make money off of other people's work? Don't they take
advantage of free labor, redistributing software under a license
that gives them preferential treatment by making direct control
of derived creative works more difficult. However, those who
just copy software (not adding anything to it), get away scott-free.
Who are the parasites? It is pretty obvious...
>
>> The GPL is a good thing for hobbyist
>> software, but ultimately being GPL'led might just be the thing which
>> prevents Linux from going mainstream in a corporate world.
>
> Tell that to Oracle, SyBase, IBM, Corel, etc.
>
A couple of the above companies do not create significant derived
works from GPLed code. They are mostly taking advantage in the sense
of CDROM vendors above. Note that I know of a couple of the
above noted companies using BSD licensed code producing derived
works AND contributing back to the free software base. They
had been doing BSD so much longer than the Linux (de-) revolution.
Note that the standard BSD license makes publicising the use of BSD'ed
code more difficult, so any unbiased observer who knows what is really
going on (I see some of the above from the inside), that the use
of BSD is vastly undercounted.
>
>> John Dyson believes fervently in that approach, and I, for one, agree with
>> him. He's simply correct.
>
> His views and yours on the subject are valid but they are not 'simply
> correct' to the exclusion of others as the above implies.
>
My views are actually that people need to review the license, and get
advice and rulings (both, as appropriate) from legal staff. If there
are any common sense problems with the license, you can usually assume
that the license is *worse* than the common-sense interpretation implies,
since a license is an ENABLING document. The default rights that you
have are per simple copyright (sometimes patent) laws...
--
John | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | it makes one look stupid
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | and it irritates the pig.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John S. Dyson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 19 Feb 1999 19:43:07 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> i like the GPL where it fits. however, i do not think it is a
> universal solution and neither is BSDL. it has its own collection of
> issues, but works well in certain cases.
>
This is precisely a correct (IMO) view... One needs to review the
licenses, in a sense like any other feature of software. The license
is a legal limitation or enabling feature as to the use of software,
like a technical feature is enabling.
I am trying to open eyes to an alternative (IMO, more correct) view
that licenses should be viewed carefully as part of the feature set.
When applying a license to your own code, you might be restricting
or enhancing it's legal "feature set." When working with code that
is licensed in certain ways, you might be restricting the utility or
feature set of your own works derived from code under certain
licenses, or restricting the utility or feature set of future
contributors.
IMO, much of the time, code written under GPL has a restricted legal
"feature set."
--
John | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | it makes one look stupid
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | and it irritates the pig.
------------------------------
From: Shaun Lipscombe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Mail client for Linux
Date: 19 Feb 1999 15:00:32 +0000
If Netscape makes you happy use it. Just don't claim that Netscape is
bug free and more capable than Pine without giving your reasoning. I
use Netscape 4.5 under windows. I no longer use it for news and mail
because I believe that it is inferior to what I currently use. I *do*
however use it for browsing but every now and then it crashes. It
doesn't happen often enough to annoy me, and I easily prefer it to IE
4 (I think that IE 5.0 is out now but I haven't seen or used it so I
cannot comment). Under linux I use 4.07 (I think), but again only for
browsing. Calling someone a 'religious bigot' because they have made
an informed choice after _trying_ alternatives is hardly justified.
Shaun
--
Linux: The best things in life are free
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John S. Dyson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 19 Feb 1999 20:02:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Girash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In comp.os.linux.misc John S. Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: In article <7ahq7a$5g8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linus Torvalds) writes:
>
>:> So then you must be happy that we changed the "free" to "open source",
>:> right?
>:>
>: Please parse FSF. Their software isn't free.
>
> This is the closest I've seen Mr Dyson come to answering the several-times-
> asked direct question in this thread: are you merely complaining about the
> association of the word "free" with GPL'd software. He's skirted the issue,
> insulted others under the guise of being insulted himself, and frankly IMHO
> made some almost-libellous statements against others.
>
The free software is being devalued by the misuse of the term, "free".
Unfortunately the term "open" has also historically been discredited.
I believe that "open source" is a better term to describe "GPLed
works", and allows for proper explaination that not only the source
that has been given to you is "open", but any of your derived or
expensive creations have to be "open."
You must have missed alot of historical context, and this has been a
big part of my disagreement with the GPL community. Note also, this
point has recently been conceded by some people in the GPL community,
because of the alternative term "Open source" being utilized by them
now. This certainly doesn't discredit me, but supports one point
that I have been making all along.
Next, it is important to make sure that the true ramifications of all
licenses used in the community. I am positive that the "Open Source"
people will present a viewpoint, and there will be others presenting
other (perhaps more realistic, or politically involved) viewpoints.
--
John | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | it makes one look stupid
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | and it irritates the pig.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John S. Dyson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 19 Feb 1999 20:08:50 GMT
In article <7aj43l$o9b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Linus Torvalds) writes:
> In article <7aiaia$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> John S. Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>
>>> So then you must be happy that we changed the "free" to "open source",
>>> right?
>>>
>>Please parse FSF. Their software isn't free.
>
> So go complain to the FSF.
>
And warn anybody about the ramifications of the license (as one
should of any license.)
>
> Don't come around complaining about people who want to use the GPL for
> their own projects.
>
If you use GPL, then it soon doesn't become "your own." You, yourself
don't hold title to the entire Linux kernel, or do you? If you did,
you could change the redistribution terms, couldn't you? (Arguments
like: "you don't want to anyway" only answer the question in your case,
but not in the general situation.)
>
> Please, just use the BSD license, I've never tried to convince you to
> use anything else. Or use the "John Dyson" license. I don't care.
> Really.
>
If you don't care, then why do you comment on it? It seems that you
do care, and are continuing to say one thing, and do another... Are
you really telling us the truth, that you don't care... Your
statements and actions seem very inconsistant. I happen to care.
>
> The _only_ thing I'm asking you, John, is to just shut up about other
> peoples choice of licenses. It's none of your business, John. You aren't
> the license police.
>
The _only_ think that I'm asking you, Linus, is to just shut up about
other people opinion about licenses. It is none of your business, Linus,
and you aren't the GPL license police. You are definitely not the
worlds license police.
I strongly suggest that people really read licenses, and get help from
their legal staff if they need it.
--
John | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | it makes one look stupid
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | and it irritates the pig.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matt Dillon)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 19 Feb 1999 13:04:04 -0800
:In article <7aj43l$o9b$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
:Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>In article <7aiaia$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
:>John S. Dyson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:>The _only_ thing I'm asking you, John, is to just shut up about other
:>peoples choice of licenses. It's none of your business, John. You aren't
:>the license police.
:>
:> Linus
Ooooo ... I can't resist. Use my Diablo/News anti-Microsoft license!
It's basically the BSD license, but with the provisio that a commercial
entity utilizing source from the distribution to produce their own
proprietary code must make the product available for either Linux or
FreeBSD, and for about the same price as they sell it for Winblows.
( Needless to say, I'm making a joke with this posting. But the license
is very real ).
-Matt
--
Matthew Dillon Engineering, HiWay Technologies, Inc. & BEST Internet
Communications
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Please include original email in any response)
------------------------------
From: Cameron Fraser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Run video clips
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 16:57:28 -0500
Joey Juyun Cho wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any way to run video clips on Linux system.
> I would appreciate it if you send me email ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) about this
> matter.
> Thanks, Joey
try xanim at the command prompt, if nothing happens you can get it at
www.linuxberg.com...good luck
--
Cameron Fraser
------------------------------
From: Paul Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc,linux.redhat.rpm
Subject: Re: KDE? Gnome? ... confused
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 11:36:38 +1100
Mike wrote:
>
> Sorry I'm a relative newbie also. How do you tell if you are using
> GNOME with your window manager or not? I have it installed and I'm
> using WindowMaker right now.
I grabbed the 0.99.7 RPMs and installed them; part of the installation is
to add/create a .xsession file in your home directory containing the line
"gnome-session" at the end. This starts the Enlightenment window manager
and the Gnome toolbar. To run the toolbar with AfterStep, I added
"AfterStep &" before the "gnome-session" line. (Ugly - Enlightenment
will still try to load, but it works. :) It may be possible to load
the toolbar without changing .xsession, but I haven't played with it
enough to find out.
These are still the development versions so they are a little flaky and
incomplete; I haven't tried 0.99.8 yet. It's probably best to wait for
Gnome 1.0 to do any serious work with Gnome. RedHat 6.0 will be a
must-have upgrade for me. :)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
[EMAIL PROTECTED] I came, I saw, I ticked.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
