Linux-Misc Digest #197, Volume #19 Sat, 27 Feb 99 00:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Zenin)
Re: Raw writing to PCMCIA SRAM cards ("Scot E. Wilcoxon")
Raw writing to PCMCIA SRAM cards ("Mark Smith")
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Jim Richardson)
Re: Configuration Error? (Jim Richardson)
Mounting a MS-DOS partition (Nicolassal)
Re: Ls command (Jim Richardson)
lilo prob ("Nick Warrington")
Re: Downloading at half the speed under Linux vs NT (Mike)
Re: Linux/FreeBSD compatability (Was Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)) (Robert
Sexton)
Re: More bad news for NT ("JACK")
installing components once linux has been installed (Chris T.)
Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing? ("David A. Frantz")
Problem Booting Linux (John Mark Emery)
Informix patches for Linux screw up laptops ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: RealPlayer 5.0 on Kernel 2.2.2 (Bob Schreibmaier)
Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing? ("David A. Frantz")
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (Paolo Costabel)
Re: ICQ for Linux (Bradley Yen)
Re: Printing under Linux ("Misterfixit")
Cable Modems with Linux (teddy j)
Q: Static Route to Gateway?? (NEWBIE) (milan andric)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
From: Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Date: 25 Feb 99 17:43:00 GMT
Joseph Malicki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>snip<
: And that's why I GPL what I write. Because I don't WANT some little-guy
: startup making a fortune off my code without my permission, while I make
: nothing.
So tell us please, of the millions you've received from your GPL
code?
For most GPLers, if they ever make enough to buy a single lunch I'd
be surprised.
I code for the enjoyment of coding. I'm also a little vain so I
do care that my name stays with my code and that it's spelled right.
BSD works great for me.
>snip<
: While I won't argue that reference code for standards should be BSD
: licensed,
So, basically, any actual innovation should be BSD licensed, but
any of the mass amounts of mindless code rewrites should be GPLed.
I understand now...
: the BSD license lets those "little-guy startups" steal all the work of a
: smaller guy without compensating him.
Again I must ask, how much have you made off your GPL code?
Yes, I make money off of other's BSD and Artistic licensed code. In
fact, I make a lot. But guess what? Others are making similar
money off of *my* BSD and Artistic licensed code. It's a two way
street and no stupid license needed to be crammed up our arse to
see it happened.
--
-Zenin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) From The Blue Camel we learn:
BSD: A psychoactive drug, popular in the 80s, probably developed at UC
Berkeley or thereabouts. Similar in many ways to the prescription-only
medication called "System V", but infinitely more useful. (Or, at least,
more fun.) The full chemical name is "Berkeley Standard Distribution".
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 20:48:45 -0600
From: "Scot E. Wilcoxon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Re: Raw writing to PCMCIA SRAM cards
> What, "dd" isn't nice enough??
Maybe "cat" or ">" will do.
(There's usually six ways to do things -- what are some more...?)
------------------------------
From: "Mark Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.portable
Subject: Raw writing to PCMCIA SRAM cards
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 17:53:05 -0000
Hello,
With the PCMCIA drivers under Linux is it possible to write a binary to an
SRAM card ?
I want to do some development for my Amstrad PDA600 and dump the programs
onto SRAM so as they'll load. The PDA requires that the binaries are
written in a "raw" format to the card, the cards musn't be treated by the
development system as though it was a disk.
Anyone know the answers ?
Regards
Mark Smith
If replying via e-mail remove my spam blocker
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 27 Feb 1999 02:52:08 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 25 Feb 99 16:48:09 GMT,
Zenin, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Richard Tobin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Theo de Raadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>writes:
> Why the hell would we want to do such a thing without some stupid
> license forcing us to?
>
> Simple. We do it for the exact same reasons GPLers do. We like to
> code and we like to reuse code. Unlike GPLers however, we also like
> to use our *own code* for something more then little toys we build
> at home. Yes, some of these derived projects may never be released
> under a BSD or GPL license. So what?
How exactly, does the GPL prevent you from reusing _your_ code in non-gpl
ways? Yes, it prevents you from using _other people's_ code, in non-GPL
ways, but not yours.
>
> We want to use our own code in the *real world*, but more
> importantly we want *others* to use our code in the real world too.
> Under BSD they we and they can. Under GPL none of us can.
>
> Why?
>
How exactly, does the GPL prevent you from reusing _your_ code in non-gpl
ways? Yes, it prevents you from using _other people's_ code, in non-GPL
ways, but not yours.
How does the GPL prevent you from releasing the same code you wrote under GPL,
under some other licence?
> Because I can not so much as cut and paste 3 lines of GPL code into
> any work I do for my company, ever. I must pretend any and all GPL
> code does not exist, completely. What does this leave GPL code use?
> To little toys I make at home. Too bad *my* most enjoyable coding
> actually happends to be *at work* (and may or may not be
> BSD/Artistic licensed).
>
GPL != toy
Unless you consider Linux a "little toy" ? or GNUEmacs?
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Subject: Re: Configuration Error?
Date: 27 Feb 1999 02:52:09 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 25 Feb 1999 18:23:53 +0100,
Torsten Schmidt., in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>If I boot my machine (P60,64MB,PCI VGA with 4MB&S3Virge,AHA2940UW)
>cold and directly into Linux and X11 with KDE the startx hangs the
>machine up.
>But if I boot the machine first into Win95 and ends this "os" to ms-dos
>and start
>the linux now with loadlin-, the startx works fine and the x11server
>works.
>Thanks for your help...
>
>
Sounds like something is being configured under windows, like a video card
or somthing. Which doesen't get properly configured under linux.
Try comparing /proc/pci between cold boot into Linux and warm boot into
Linux from windows.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: Nicolassal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Mounting a MS-DOS partition
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 19:28:56 -0800
Hello,
I would like to apologize for my ignorance, however, I am having trouble
mounting a MS-DOS partition. My hard drive is mounted under /dev/hda,
however, I've tried to mount the MS-DOS partition as follows:
mount /dev/hda6 /temp -t msdos
I've also tried
mount /dev/hda6 /temp -t umsdos
Oh... By the way, I am using windows 98, with my MS-DOS all FAT32. Is
there something I can do to mount the partition? Any help would be
greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Nick
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PS Sorry for my ignorance... But I'm learning this stuff.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Ls command
Date: 27 Feb 1999 02:51:52 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 25 Feb 1999 15:20:36 +0100,
Luca Satolli, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Hi,
>I've seen the option --color in man pages of 'ls', I think it's very
>usefull, I'd like to know if I could select it by default so that I
>haven't to type it all times.
>Thanks a lot & best regards
>Luca Satolli
>
I put
alias lc='ls --color'
in .bashrc, so if I want a color listing, lc does it, plain listing, ls.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: "Nick Warrington" <nick@(NOSPAM_TA_VERY_MUCH)majikman.demon.co.uk>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: lilo prob
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 00:23:34 -0000
I have in the past configured lilo to boot off different partitions on the
same hd. However I recently installed a new hard disk and formatted the disk
for a linux installation. I thought I had configured lilo to list two
bootable partitions on different disks. The primary master for linux and the
second master for win98 (dont laugh, I need it right now), with a cdrom as a
primary slave. However lilo fails to jump to the second disk to boot Win98.
It appears in the menu to select, but simply will not even begin to boot
from it.
Any thoughts anyone??
Thanks in advance
Nick
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike)
Subject: Re: Downloading at half the speed under Linux vs NT
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 02:31:49 GMT
Doh! There is a Modem How To now. Guess I should check the LDP site
more frequently for updates. I'd still like to hear any suggestions
someone might have.
Thanks
mike
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Sexton)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Linux/FreeBSD compatability (Was Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?))
Date: 27 Feb 1999 02:55:36 GMT
Matthias Buelow ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: brian moore wrote:
: > Why not just make the tables it needs public instead of adding
: > yet-another-suid program to the mix of potential security holes?
: Although /proc, /kern etc. are somewhat useful, I also like the
: straight simple read-kmem approach; especially since its uses
: are not limited beforehand. For often used stuff such as processes,
: a seperate /proc structure may be useful, but for more rarely
: used kernel variables the effort is probably not necessary;
: and then on BSD there's the sysctl(3) system call, a very powerful
: facility to read (and set) most important kernel variables.
: I find this much cleaner and consistent than reading ascii files
: on non-process related information in /proc.
: Using kmem reads keeps the cruft low, and does not make the
: kernel more complicated than it should. Of course, it has
: some disadvantages, which you mentioned.
The sad part is that the industry came so far without working these
things out. getloadavg() appeared in 4.3-RENO. What took so long?
(I don't know how it was done in the 4.2 days, That was when I was a
SVID guy. The BSD folks always had cooler toys :-)
I remember /proc in SysVR4.
It was a neat solution to the problem. At the very least, it meant
that all of these programs approached the problem the same way, so
portability was more doable. FreeBSD has /kern and sysctl, which seem
to be the best solution. Unfortunately, this stuff started with 4.4.
Its too bad the Linux/BSD camps didn't talk about this stuff back when
interfaces were being rolled.
--
Robert Sexton - [EMAIL PROTECTED], Cincinnati OH, USA
If car manufactures were the nra their slogan would be
"Cars don't kill comunities, people kill communities." - Unknown
Read the Newton FAQ! <http://www.kudra.com/newton/newton-faq>
------------------------------
From: "JACK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.linux
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 03:23:07 -0000
. Give me a simple line
>command interface (as in NT 5?!) and I'll be happy.
NT5 surely you mean windows2000, all the NT bloat and dodge server apps +
the overburding win98\ie 4 interface with a host of incomperhensable
wizards. crist in 95 you the wizard had 3-4 screens for installing hardware
in 98 it went up 9-8. this is for a simple task i can imagine a 200 screen
wizard to setup RAS.
j
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris T.)
Subject: installing components once linux has been installed
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 03:36:00 GMT
Does anyone know how i install other components once linux has already
installed? I'm using Linux Redhat version 4.2.
------------------------------
From: "David A. Frantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing?
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 20:47:15 -0500
Robert Krawitz wrote in message ...
>"David A. Frantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Robert Krawitz wrote in message ...
>
>> >I think this is a tad unfair. I'm disappointed that Linus doesn't
>> >want to enable large memory addressing on the x86.
>>
>> As with any general purpose operateing system there are trade offs, one
>> outstanding feature of Linux is the freedom to transform it into
something
>> that suits your purposes. The reallity is that there is nothing to be
>> gained by trying to use a special capability of the XEON just to fillfull
>> the special needs of a few users. This is especially the case when the
>> Chip and Chip SETs are not suited for the application. I firmly
believe
>> that if you really need 64 bit addressing to main memory then you need to
>> look at a 64 bit system.
>
>Well, Xeon boxes seem to be awfully popular these days. And again:
>there's a lot of software (even for Linux) that only runs on x86.
>Folks who want to use Oracle don't have the option of getting an Alpha.
They may be popular some where in the world, but the cost is a consideration
especial considering there limit capability increase over the rest ot the
Intel family. I still of the opinion if you need more than 32 bit
addressing then you should jump to a 64 bit system. Why screw around with
a solution that at best is only temporary.
>
>> >Job mixes that are more memory/IO than computation intensive (which is
>> >the case for a lot of commercial data processing) would benefit
>> >greatly from the availability of large memory on commodity hardware.
>>
>> Why would anyone do commercial data processing in large pools of main
>> memory? Seems awfully risky. Actually large memory systems and
heavy
>> computation base apps go hand in hand.
>
>Example: something that's trying to join a stream of transactions to
>accounts. Database (and non-database) joins can always use all the
>memory they can get their grubby little paws on.
>
>Actually, on further thought Linus's last message on the topic
>suggested using the extra RAM as a ramdisk. If the machine then
>swapped to the ramdisk, things would work reasonably well.
This is something that is totally different than addressable application
space. RAM disks can be very useful but they really aren't part of the
applications address space or shouldn't be.
>
>
>[Disclaimer: that I'm not a disinterested observer: I work for Torrent
>Systems: http://www.torrent.com/. However, this posting is completely
>my own opinion, and does not reflect any official company policy.]
>
>--
>Robert Krawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.tiac.net/users/rlk/
>
>Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
>Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>"Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
>--Eric Crampton
------------------------------
From: John Mark Emery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Problem Booting Linux
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 10:42:32 -0800
Hello,
Rebooted my Linux machine yesterday and it wouldn't reboot! After the
SCSI card finds it's devices (it finds the device the / partition lives
on) the machine just hangs for a while and gives me an "unable to find
boot device (or something like that)" message. It boots fine with a
kernel boot disk. I can't get the machine to boot off of the HD anymore
though. I'm running Slackware with kernel version 2.0.34. The machine
is a Dell Optiplex GXi. It's using an adaptec 2940 UW SCSI card, the
Drive is a 1gb DEC SCSI 2.
After rebooting with the boot disk, I reran lilo. That didn't work. I
reran liloconfig. That didn't work. I ran fdisk and toggled the
bootable flag on the / partition on...reran liloconfig. Nothing seems
to work anymore. It booted fine from the HD last week. Would running
fsck on the / device help?
I could live with booting from the floppy disk if I wasn't having a
memory problem. When I set up the machine, I had to add a line in the
/etc/lilo.conf file (append="mem=128M") 'cuz the machine has 128 MB of
memory and LINUX doesn't recognize that much memory on its own. When I
boot with the floppy I'm back to seeing only 14MB of total real memory.
Is there a way to make the boot floppy use the /etc/lilo.conf file? Or
to copy it to the boot floppy?
Any advice? Thanks for your time. Please email me with any responses
if possible.
--
John Emery
System Administrator
Sue Mills, Inc.
1840 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
415-864-1899 X146
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.databases.informix,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Informix patches for Linux screw up laptops
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 18:46:18 GMT
Hi all!
I have installed the informix 7.3 ids on few computers and always installed
the required patches from redhat and informix.
I always got some error messages while it tried to remove a non-empty
directory, but the computer booted and informix worked.
Trying to install those patches on a laptop display the same errors, the
computer still boots - but all the PCMCIA devices and drivers can not be seen
or accessed any more.
Does anybody have any experience with Linux and laptops??
Cheers
Shay Tochner
International Systems Support Specialist
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Schreibmaier)
Subject: Re: RealPlayer 5.0 on Kernel 2.2.2
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 03:34:56 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Sam Vere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Fri, 26 Feb 1999 18:50:01 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob
>Schreibmaier) wrote:
>
>>I just upgraded to kernel 2.2.2, using XFree86 3.3.3.1, and
>>noticed that RealPlayer 5.0 has stopped working. It starts
>>up with the usual window, but gives the dreaded "Error 1" as
>>soon as it starts playing the movie.
>>
>According to the kernal docoumentation, RealPlayer 5.0 exploited a bug
>in the sound system that no longer exists in the 2.2.x kernals.
>
>I understand that steps are being taken to solve this. Perhaps they'll
>upgrade it to G2 whilst they're at it...
Thanks to everyone who responded and/or posted a follow-up message.
It turns out one just has to RTFM, er, read the Changes file under
the Documentation directory with the kernel source. There is a
pre-load program called "rpopen" which may be downloaded from:
http://onramp.i2k.com/~jeffd/rpopen
however, I chose to patch the rvplayer binary itself. If you try this,
be sure to make a copy of the original binary before you do the patch!
Here are the instructions for patching the original rvplayer binary:
dd if=/dev/zero of=rvplayer bs=1 count=1 seek=657586 conv=notrunc
dd if=/dev/zero of=rvplayer bs=1 count=1 seek=665986 conv=notrunc
dd if=/dev/zero of=rvplayer bs=1 count=1 seek=702554 conv=notrunc
When you're done with these three lines, you should have a new rvplayer
binary that is able to play Real Video files, such as the movie trailer
for South Park... 8^{)
Bob
--
+--------------------------------------------------------+
| Bob Schreibmaier K3PH | E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
| Kresgeville, PA 18333 | ICBM: 40o55'N 75o30'W |
+--------------------------------------------------------+
------------------------------
From: "David A. Frantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing?
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 20:57:15 -0500
Seth;
Well stated!!!!
The problem is that people are embarrasssed at times when they go out and by
Apple computers even if there running Linux. I mention Apple due the fact
that they have the only mass produced non i386 system on the market.
Apple would do well if they would openly support Linux development on there
machines, everyone knows that the MAC OS is a little gray in the beard. I
know at one time they where doing so with a Mach kernel. I would love to
see a mass produced Alpha or PowerPC system, with standardized hardware,
that would be true competition for the i386 market.
Dave
Seth Van Oort wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>Linux has helped people break out from being under the control of
>Microsoft by providing options in software. I hope it can help us escape
>the control of Intel as well. People are reluctant to get other
>processors even when they are obviously better, because they don't bear
>the Intel name. The markups on their high end processors compared to the
>performance gain is so incredibly ridiculous. If that trend would end,
>life would be sunnier in the computing world.
>
>Seth
>
>Robert Krawitz wrote:
>>
>> "David A. Frantz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> > Robert Krawitz wrote in message ...
>>
>> > >I think this is a tad unfair. I'm disappointed that Linus doesn't
>> > >want to enable large memory addressing on the x86.
>> >
>> > As with any general purpose operateing system there are trade offs, one
>> > outstanding feature of Linux is the freedom to transform it into
something
>> > that suits your purposes. The reallity is that there is nothing to
be
>> > gained by trying to use a special capability of the XEON just to
fillfull
>> > the special needs of a few users. This is especially the case when
the
>> > Chip and Chip SETs are not suited for the application. I firmly
believe
>> > that if you really need 64 bit addressing to main memory then you need
to
>> > look at a 64 bit system.
>>
>> Well, Xeon boxes seem to be awfully popular these days. And again:
>> there's a lot of software (even for Linux) that only runs on x86.
>> Folks who want to use Oracle don't have the option of getting an Alpha.
>>
>> > >Job mixes that are more memory/IO than computation intensive (which is
>> > >the case for a lot of commercial data processing) would benefit
>> > >greatly from the availability of large memory on commodity hardware.
>> >
>> > Why would anyone do commercial data processing in large pools of main
>> > memory? Seems awfully risky. Actually large memory systems and
heavy
>> > computation base apps go hand in hand.
>>
>> Example: something that's trying to join a stream of transactions to
>> accounts. Database (and non-database) joins can always use all the
>> memory they can get their grubby little paws on.
>>
>> Actually, on further thought Linus's last message on the topic
>> suggested using the extra RAM as a ramdisk. If the machine then
>> swapped to the ramdisk, things would work reasonably well.
>>
>> [Disclaimer: that I'm not a disinterested observer: I work for Torrent
>> Systems: http://www.torrent.com/. However, this posting is completely
>> my own opinion, and does not reflect any official company policy.]
>>
>> --
>> Robert Krawitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.tiac.net/users/rlk/
>>
>> Tall Clubs International -- http://www.tall.org/ or 1-888-IM-TALL-2
>> Member of the League for Programming Freedom -- mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>> "Linux doesn't dictate how I work, I dictate how Linux works."
>> --Eric Crampton
------------------------------
From: Paolo Costabel <[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: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 01:23:28 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"John Selph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> They're ugly trust me. After the panic I saw, the contents of the ext2
> system were unrepairable. Look you guys, the truth is your right. Your
> computer and your OS are great. They do exactly what you want and they more
> often than not work great. But take a deep breath and step back, there are
> other systems out there that also work pretty well. Personally, I hate all
> operating systems. They all suck, every last one of them. I want a system
> that does 5 things:
> 1. doesn't have to be installed. doesn't have to be configured to work
> better. it does all that.
> 2. does any task you want without having to install or load anything new.
> who invented software anyway.
> 3. reads any format file.
> 4. prints anything to anything. no drivers. no capture, no remote
> printer, no redirection.
> 5. uses new hardware without installing anything or loading anything.
>
>
One word: Jini.
=====================================================================
Paolo Costabel Unite for Java! http://www.javalobby.org
Sony Imageworks
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Bradley Yen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ICQ for Linux
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 18:38:04 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sure it will, why shouldn't it. If it didn't work with other ICQ clients
running on different platforms then it wouldn't be know as ICQ.
The answer is yes.
jas shultz wrote:
> Does the linux ver of ICQ (i.e. licq, micq, etc.) work with other ver's?
> Such as, a person running a WinNT ver of ICQ is logged on, if I run licq,
> will I be able to tell if he's online?
>
------------------------------
From: "Misterfixit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: Printing under Linux
Date: 26 Feb 1999 17:39:22 PST
Ghostscript and GIMP will do the trick for you. I have and use GIMP from my
RH5,2 distribution and found it has a easy to set up configuration menu. It
even prints a very awesome color printer test page which when done on my HP
672C Deskjet in the super-good mode and with coated paper looks like a laser
print.
Hope this helps
Dave
RH5.2 running 7/24/365 no problemo
Gregory Leblanc wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I know how to get simple directory listings and plain text to print on
>my printer, but what about color images from GIMP? I've got a couple
>of color HP inkjet printers, and I wanted to do some of image
>processing from there. Thanks,
> Greg.
>Greg Leblanc
>Network Admin
>Concordia University Portland
>gleblanc at cu-portland.edu
------------------------------
From: teddy j <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,alt.linux,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Cable Modems with Linux
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 04:40:18 GMT
1) We have a cable modem, and our provider sez that it only works on
Win95. I've heard that there are ways to get around this so that
I can use it on linux. Any ideas?
2) How would I setup 2 systems to share the same cable modem? I'm
told that there might be a way to setup the first system as a proxy
server...that wd run Win95, and then connect my linux system thru
that. In the end, both systems could use the cable modem, and that
would be great!! Anyone know how to do this?
thanx
ted
--
how would you like to get 1/2% of $2 Trillion?
see http://freedomstarr.com/?JO4554535
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: milan andric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Q: Static Route to Gateway?? (NEWBIE)
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 13:38:39 -0600
hi,
i'm trying to get my network running on slakware 3.5 (kernel 2.0.35).
basically when i try to set the default gateway it says that it can't find
the network. i tried making my gateway (isdn router address) a host and
then setting the default gateway and it still doesn't work. in the man
pages it says that before i can set my default gateway i have to have a
'static setup' before hand, i couldn't find anymore info on what static
means. i read something in a different flavor of unix that the metric
number 0 is used for network interfaces and 1 for gateway interfaces.
i thought it easy as giving my ethernet an address and a route to my
gateway and netmask and it would work.. i'm obviously wrong because i
don't think linux can see my gateway beforehand, and i don't know how to
point to it.
thanks for any help
milan
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
