Linux-Misc Digest #210, Volume #19 Sat, 27 Feb 99 16:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Richard Caley)
Re: Mysterious CPU load. (Daniel Sladic)
Re: RedHat 5.2 --> 2.2 Kernel ("J. Lucha")
Re: Linux/FreeBSD compatability (Was Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)) (Mike
Willett LADS LDN X7563)
Re: Pentium III and Linux (Timothy Murphy)
Re: Going from Win 98 and Office 97 to Linux and ???? (Ivan Bilenkey)
Re: Pentium III and Linux (Robert Hampf)
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (jedi)
Re: Linux/FreeBSD compatability (Was Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)) (brian
moore)
Re: The .pl- extension? ("J�rgen Exner")
Problem while booting linux through LILO or boot-disk (Kumar Dwarakanath)
Re: PPP for network connection?? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Vote for the next leader of the free world! (Niranjan Ramakrishnan)
SCSI Card Not Detected (John Garrison)
Re: Overclocking (was: Re: K6-2 and Linux, Are there any Bug?) (GBP)
Re: Has anyone tried Applixware Office Suite 4.4.1?
[HELP] Which file mode allows ADD only? (Lam Dang)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Andrew Smallshaw)
Re: Linux Kernel source code, line by line ("Brett R. Rosselle")
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Gregory L. Hansen)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Zenin)
Re: Face it, linux is a piece of shit (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Zenin)
Re: Any JDK for Linux? (Hans Wolters)
Re: Printer Lexmark 1000 in Linux ? (Grant Taylor)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Richard Caley)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Richard Caley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 26 Feb 1999 15:59:19 +0000
In article <KZyB2.251$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christopher J Mattern (cjm) writes:
cjm> Actually, I'd kinda hope they'd use the same sort of lawyers, since the
cjm> ones they're using in the DOJ case don't seem to be able to find their
cjm> asses with guides and a strip map.
This is New Improved Lawyer-98. It's the same lawyer you would have
had in the distant past, but with a flashy new suit, and the belief
that she can work on two briefs at one time, though she lacks the
skill to do so effectively.
--
Mail me as rjc not [EMAIL PROTECTED] _O_
|<
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Sladic)
Subject: Re: Mysterious CPU load.
Date: 27 Feb 1999 19:02:42 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Thomas S. Urban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Daniel Sladic wrote:
>>
>> In article <7b83r7$3cq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> Dan Nguyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >Daniel Sladic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> >: I recently upgraded my system to a K6-2 350 based board and
>> >: noticed the following very strange problem. If I leave my system
>> >: alone, the CPU load will jump to 30%. Over the next 5 to 10 minutes
>> >: it will slowly drop to near 0% and then jump back to 30%. Using
>> >: top the two processes that are doing this are the X server (Mach64)
>> >: and Windowmaker.
>> >
>> >Probably have a cron job doing something, or some other sleeping
>> >process wakes to do something.
>> >
>> As I mentioned, top shows the CPU load coming from the X server and
>> the windowmanager. Besides, the load is very regular in the way it slows
>> down. The graphical load display shows a right-angled triangle, which
>> is the same every 5 minutes or so.
>>
>> It worked fine on my old system. The only change was the motherboard/CPU
>> and SCSI card. Very strange.
>>
>> Dan.
>
>Have you checked the error output of X and the windowmanager?
>If you haven't, there maybe some clues in the output that correspond
>with the spike in CPU usage.
But it wasn't a spike, really. It would jump to 30% and SLOWLY work down to 0%.
Doesn't seem like an error condition.
The good news is that last night I noticed it didn't occur under fvwm. So I
upgraded Windowmaker from 0.20.2 to 0.51.0 and the problem went away. It
doesn't make sense but I'll live with it. :)
Dan.
------------------------------
From: "J. Lucha" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: cmp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: RedHat 5.2 --> 2.2 Kernel
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:28:42 -0800
RedHat has a HOWTO at:
http://www.redhat.com/support/docs/rhl/kernel-2.2/kernel2.2-upgrade.html
If they happen to have changed the location, you can get to it by going
to their main site, choosing "Support" at the top of the page.
Then choose the errata page for RedHat 5.2. On that page near the top is
a link to the HOWTO.
To get the files needed for the upgrade, just go to their ftp site, they
have a directory called 2_2Kernel.
Then you'll have to download the kernel source from a mirror of
ftp.kernel.org.
I'm not sure if the 2.0 series didn't need the program as86, because I
kept getting a message that the program wasn't found, and I've compiled
my kernel several times for the 2.0 series. Maybe the upgrade from 5 -->
5.2 didn't update that rpm, but check
to see if you have the bin86 rpm package installed. If you use glint,
it's found under development/languages. If it's not installed, do so, or
you'll have the same problem I had.
WARNING: RedHat has they call Rawhide. You can get even later releases
of rpm's there. Don't use them. I used versions
of all the files from there, and the initscripts package made my machine
unbootable. Thank God for boot disks!
Good Luck
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]<M.com (Mike Willett LADS LDN X7563)
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: 26 Feb 1999 16:27:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Zenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] <M.com(MikeWillettLADSLDNX7563)> wrote:
>: With all this talk about FreeBSD/Linux issues, I was thinking
>: about compatability issues with the two system.
>:
>: Is it possible to have both a FreeBSD kernel and a Linux
>: kernel on the same system ?
>
> Well, yes, but you'd have to have both systems installed
> independently.
I was more interested in being able to boot into the same file
systems.
>: Can a FreedBSD kernel be compiled on a Linux system ?
>
> You have an easier time (and about the same results) by simply
> building the GNU tool sets on FreeBSD.
>
>: (and vica-versa) ?
>
> Maybe (if you build glibc and such), but why?
Because I want to play ;-)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Timothy Murphy)
Subject: Re: Pentium III and Linux
Date: 26 Feb 1999 18:09:03 -0000
"Sam Freiberg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>BTW - as far as I know
>all the added instructions are designed for graphics, primarily internet
>graphics at that, so I doubt very much that Linux will ever support them.
I don't follow the logic of this.
--
Timothy Murphy
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel: +353-1-2842366
s-mail: School of Mathematics, Trinity College, Dublin 2, Ireland
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 18:59:39 +0000
From: Ivan Bilenkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.portable,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.install,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Going from Win 98 and Office 97 to Linux and ????
Gregory Propf wrote:
> Rod Roark wrote:
> >
> > Sniper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >...
> > >2. What can I use application wise that's not going to involve a huge
> > >leap from Office ? and provide backwards compatibility with Word and
> > >Excel 97 ?
>
> For wordprocessing please consider Wordperfect 7.xxx (I'm not sure what
> the current version number is) They fully support Linux and their
> wordprocessor can read Microsoft formats. Their product is also faster,
> smaller, more stable and just better all round than the comparable
> Microsoft crap.
>
> Office includes the MS access database which is nothing more than
> Microsoft's attempt to turn SQL into a proprietary Microsoft language.
> Consider Postgress, MySQL or about a dozen other Linux SQL products that
> do everything access does but faster and in a non-proprietary way.
>
> I honestly can't tell you much about spreadsheets. There's a commercial
> spreadsheet for Linux whose name escapes me right now but which reads
> Excel files.
>
> Finally, consider Star Office. It is a complete package the way Office
> is and I believe is now freeware.
>
> --
>
> "I wanted plutonium, not Beanie Babies..."
> - Sadaam Hussein, in a letter to Santa Claus.
StarOffice does it all. Its free for non-commercial use.
Ivan.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Hampf)
Subject: Re: Pentium III and Linux
Date: 26 Feb 1999 18:28:58 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> h�lt �essu fram:
:
: So will for example the 450MHz pentium III based machine work with
: SuSe (as an example) or will it be better to spend my money on a
: lower spec. machine ?
It will anyway according to:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/990224-000022.html
rh
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
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 10:44:17 -0800
On Fri, 26 Feb 1999 23:07:54 -0600, Jon Wiest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Redhat 5.0 detects all my hardware.
>
>
>What??? Do you *have* any hardware to detect? Oh sure, it get the hard
>drives right. It did nicely detect my ATI Rage2, which I appreciate. But
>not my Wacom pad, my modem, my sound card, my IDE Zip, my Voodoo2.
The modem? What is there to detect; it just sits on a com port.
The soundcard is a redhat matter, their soundcard support has
always left a bit to be desired. The zip, as an ide device with
an ide id, should have been autodetected just fine as should the
the voodoo2.
Bus 0, device 8, function 0:
Multimedia video controller: 3Dfx Voodoo2 (rev 2).
Fast devsel. Fast back-to-back capable.
Prefetchable 32 bit memory at 0xe4000000 [0xe4000008].
I wouldn't trust Windows with non-PCI autodetection either.
--
Herding Humans ~ Herding Cats
Neither will do a thing unless they really want to, or |||
is coerced to the point where it will scratch your eyes out / | \
as soon as your grip slips.
In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
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: 26 Feb 1999 18:30:13 GMT
On Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:01:24 -0500,
Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It's a sad but true fact that there's a lot of Linux -only programs out
> there. You very rarely see "FreeBSD-only" stuff out there. The solution to
> this is, let's get some kind of add-on to FreeBSD that allows us to include
> Linux include files (no pun intended) and link with Linux libs on FreeBSD,
> in order to achieve greater interoperability between the two. And let's fix
> that IBCS module so we can run FreeBSD programs on Linux. ;)
Actually, all the major x86 Unix players (including Sun and SCO) agreed
a couple years ago to standardize executables. This is part of why
Linux is moving to glibc2 (since it's been deemed the library to match)
and why the BSD's are moving to ELF (since that was the executable
format to match).
SCO is now claiming to run Linux binaries (ie, they have a library that
is compatible with glibc2 and use ELF executables). Sun will probably
announce their status in the agreement soon (like SCO, they already do
ELF, so it's just library issues).
It's not as "run anywhere" as Java, say, but it is closer than the Unix
implementations have been in a long time. (And hopefully work on this
will lead to compatibility on other platforms than x86: with one binary
covering SPARC/Solaris,NetBSD,OpenBSD and Linux, for example.)
--
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: "J�rgen Exner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The .pl- extension?
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:26:35 -0800
Chris Mahmood wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>it's a script in Polish...
This is good one, I like it.
I'm only afraid, someone might take it serious .....
BTW: To the original poster.
The ending of a file name has no meaning in UNIX, it's just for human
comfort.
To find out about what a file is use "file <filename>". It will guess the
type of the file based on the actual content (not based on the file name)
and usually it's correct in about 99.5% of all files.
jue
------------------------------
From: Kumar Dwarakanath <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware,cmu.comp.os.linux,cmu.cs.linux.forum
Subject: Problem while booting linux through LILO or boot-disk
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 14:20:00 -0500
Hi,
I have a SCSI (AHA2740-2840-2940) card for my CD-ROM drive. While doing
the
installation (Redhat 5.2) the program is able to probe and find out the
card and initialize
the CD-ROM to function properly. This helps me in completing the
installation.
When I want to boot using LILO or the boot disk I get the following
error and the
system stops booting:
Loading aic7xxx module..
(SCSI0) found at EISA slot....
(SCSI0) Twin channel....
(SCSI0) Downloading sequencer code... 423 instructions downloaded
(SCSI0) BRKADRINT error (0x8):
Sequencer Ram Parity error
Kernel Panic: aic7xxx: unrecoverable BRKADRINT
Aieee: scheduling in interrupt 0016d2a0
Aieee: scheduling in interrupt 0016d2a0
Aieee: scheduling in interrupt 0016d2a0
Aieee: scheduling in interrupt 0016d2a0
Aieee: scheduling in interrupt 0016d2a0
Please help with any suggestions. I have been trying various things
but it does not seem to work. Have spent so much time just getting
the system to boot!!!
Thanks in advance.
Kumar.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: PPP for network connection??
Date: 26 Feb 1999 18:21:03 GMT
In linux.redhat.misc Craig Shields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
# ping any machine on the LAN, but can't get mail or PPP internet
# access to work. I am yet another immigrant to Linux from Win95/98/NT and
if you're on a LAN, why are you trying to do PPP? if you can't get to
anything off of the LAN, check the routing tables (netstat -nr), you need to
have a default route of your gateway off of the LAN.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux
From: Niranjan Ramakrishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Vote for the next leader of the free world!
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 14:32:21 -0500
Hi,
Check out this cool poll at http://www.linuxcare.com!
CHOOSE THE NEXT LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD
- Bill Bradley
- George Bush, Jr.
- Bill Gates
- Al Gore
- Dan Quayle
- Linus Torvalds
I think the choice is pretty clear :-)
Ciao,
Niranjan
------------------------------
From: John Garrison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: SCSI Card Not Detected
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 18:52:25 GMT
I cannot get the kernel to detect my scsi card. When I insmod or
modprobe scsi_debug, it detects about 20 nonexistant removable hard
drives. When I try to install a driver module for scsi cards it says
that the device is busy. How can I make it find my one scsi card and
ignore all the fake ones. I previously thought I had a scanner problem
because I couldn't get it to find the scanner, but it is the scsi card
that needs detected.
------------------------------
From: GBP <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux.slackware,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Overclocking (was: Re: K6-2 and Linux, Are there any Bug?)
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 13:36:11 -0500
Yeah point well taken. But is it true that overclocking can result in
system instability? When netscape crashes how am i going to know it was
a bug and not my CPU doing and instruction wrong or something? When
people say instability what exactly do they mean? do these machines
freeze?
gbp
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ()
Subject: Re: Has anyone tried Applixware Office Suite 4.4.1?
Date: 26 Feb 1999 16:19:07 GMT
On Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:17:03 +1100, Ahrum Song <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am interested in how well Applixware word processing program can
>handle (especially read/import) MS-Word97 documnents.
i've use Applixware for quite a while (on my third Linux version now)... i
find the Word97 handling *very* disappointing... importing some docs
results in Applixware going away... the latest patches screwed up an
install on COL1.3...
there is good news, however... StarOffice 5.0 seems to handle Word97
documents quite well (i'm not so sure about other parts of StarOffice)...
in this regard, i fear that my latest Applixware *upgrade* (which
really wasn't, ticked me off, and is another issue) will be my last... it's
a shame, as i've used Applix to write at least two books...
for now, i'm moving to StarOffice 5.0
just my $0.2
billy ball
>
>Thanks,
>Ahrum
>
>
------------------------------
From: Lam Dang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [HELP] Which file mode allows ADD only?
Date: 26 Feb 1999 11:14:10 -0500
I want to make an EXT2 directory available to NFS
and Samba clients for incoming stuffs. I want
them to be able to add files to this directory but
not to delete them from it (even the ones they've
created themselves).
Can this be done with the EXT2 file system at all?
Perhaps it supports extra mode bits?
--
Lam Dang
PGP key available as [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew Smallshaw)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 25 Feb 1999 16:37:10 GMT
On Tue, 23 Feb 1999 22:46:30 -0500, Joseph Malicki wrote:
>
> nothing. BSD is good because it lets other people STEAL your code, while
> the GPL doesn't. While I won't argue that reference code for standards
How does BSD let people _steal_ your code? The BSD licence says `if you want
to use my code, that's fine by me.' If you give people permission to use your
code without many restrictions, how can they be charged with `stealing' when
they subsequently do?
--
Andrew Smallshaw
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Brett R. Rosselle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux Kernel source code, line by line
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 12:02:29 -0500
Try http://www.kernel.org
Sanchis Eric wrote:
> Can someone tell me if some books or documents describing line by line the
> Linux kernel source code ( like the Minix / Tanenbaum's book ) exist?
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 25 Feb 1999 17:10:45 GMT
In article <7b2tjo$7l7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Patrick M. Hausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Gregory L. Hansen
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The main point of all this reasoning is: people, please be aware of
>the implications of the GPL. It takes away rights from developers.
I think that's a pretty strong statement. That's like saying my owning of
my computer takes away from schoolkids' rights, because they don't have a
right to use it as they please. It may restrict the rights of other
developers to use the code and then require money for it, but it also
protects the rights of the guy who wrote it in the first place! It's like
proprietary code, only less so. (Is the only reason people are arguing
about GPL but not proprietary stuff like Mathematica because everyone
knows it's beyond their reach?)
Those free software people are on a mission. They think software should
be free. Ever read their manifesto? Some of them really believe in it.
And they're not doing that by pirating software! They're doing that
by writing their own, offering it for free and unrestricted use, and
requiring derivative works to also be free. (You can charge for it if you
want, but it's still basically free.)
I, for one, don't think developers *should* have any rights to other
people's property, except what they can negotiate with the authors. If
someone offers their code under the GPL, you say "thank you" because
they're letting you have it and the source code for free. (And if someone
offers it under the BSD license, you may say "many thanks, munificent
one".) It's a different level of generosity, but it's still a level of
generosity beyond expectations.
>Period. If other's contribute patches to a GPL'ed product, then
>even the original author can't build an embedded product using
>these patches - even though he did most of the work in the first
>place.
Embedded product? Why in the world not? You sell the hardware, who cares
what happens to the software, as long as it makes the hardware work?
>If you think this is what you want, GPL your code - fine.
>
>Just be aware, that GPL is not necessarily a "good thing" [tm]
>because RMS and Linus say so.
I don't share their mission, but I respect it.
------------------------------
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 17:30:05 GMT
Joseph Malicki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>snip<
: There is nothing in the GPL which says that the code cannot also be
: released under a different license.
However, that is it's practical effect.
If you don't believe me, please list the few hundreds (thousands?)
of people LINUS HIMSELF would would have to independently contact to
get a different license for the Linux.
So yes, GPL effectively removes all ability to release code under a
different license.
: Why? Personally I prefer GPL, since I can always release my code under
: dual licenses (GPL and commercial for the same code), and unlike BSD,
: someone cannot build a commercial product from my code without my
: permission. They can put it on a CD and charge for the CD, but so what?
: They can't build a competing product if I decide to maintain a separate,
: more featured, commercial version.
However, if you ever roll anyone elses GPL code back into your work
(the main point of GPL after all, yes?) YOU YOURSELF will have to
independently contact each and every one of those people people
if you ever decide to later create your "separate, more featured,
commercial version".
You have lost the freedom to control your own code.
: > FreeBSD's advantage over Linux isn't related to GPL, but partially to my
: > FREE works. With GPL it is a one way street to the marketeers. It is
: > wonderful that WC does promote a software product that truely helps the
: > programmer also. (Sure there is a little GPL thrown in there, but at
: > least there is free software there also.)
:
: I still don't see how Walnut Creek helps the programmers any more than
: Red Hat does.
By promoting a BSD licensed product. Oh, and the fact that all
(yes, all) revenues currently received for FreeBSD CDs is currently
being given back to the FreeBSD project.
--
-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".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Face it, linux is a piece of shit
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 22:36:18 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Wed, 24 Feb 1999 18:22:42 GMT...
..and Bill Gates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have to work on this crummy os and it's hateful.
>
> Long live Bill, errrrr...... me!
*PLONK*
X-Post and Flup2 set.
mawa
--
> Open Software and freeing source code isn't socialism.
Isn't socialist. It's neither socialist nor capitalist; it just is.
-- Marco Anglesio
------------------------------
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 17:35:35 GMT
John Girash <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>snip<
: I'm going to make a bold statement here: Linux would be where it is today
: whether its codebase was largely (L)GPL, BSDL, ArtisticL, or
: PublicDomain.(*) So would Free/Open/NetBSD (pending original UCB licencing
: etc).
>snip<
No, they wouldn't. You might want to do a little research and look
at how much commercial created code has been rolled back into the
FreeBSD tree. Code that, if FreeBSD lived under the GPL, would
quite likely never have been created.
--
-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".
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Hans Wolters)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.java.setup,comp.lang.java.api
Subject: Re: Any JDK for Linux?
Date: 26 Feb 1999 19:32:59 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 26 Feb 1999 12:57:15 -0500, James Tam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I am looking for a JDK for Linux.
>Anyone know anything?
>
>Thanks
> James
Hi James,
go to
www.blackdown.org
You can find the 1.02 to 1.1.7 there. For Swing you will need the solaris
version from Javasoft.
Hans
--
Java Search Engine Front End
http://home.gelrevision.nl/~h.wolter/
Linux Links/CMI8330 Soundpro HOWTO
http://home.gelrevision.nl/~h.wolter/linux.htm
------------------------------
From: Grant Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Printer Lexmark 1000 in Linux ?
Date: 25 Feb 1999 12:53:28 -0500
Fonzy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm just starting with Linux from Mandrake v 53-2 distrubitor. I
> Had trouble setting my Printer Lexmark 1000 in msdos (promt) in
> win95, in fact i couldn't set it up.
> But in Linux i Would really like to make it work.
I'm afraid you're out of luck. Lexmark doesn't document the contorl
codes for this printer, so no one has been able to write a driver for
it to work under Linux. Embarassingly for Lexmark, they have their
name stamped on the largest group of Linux-incompatible printers.
Note that there is a fellow reverse-engineering the protocol for the
more recent model 7000: http://bimbo.fjfi.cvut.cz/~paluch/l7kdriver/
It's possible that someday in the future he'll expand support to other
Lexmark printers (most of the other inkjets are also unsupported).
The Printing HOWTO's compatibility list is at
http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/pht/printer_list.cgi
--
Grant Taylor - gtaylor@picante<dot>com - http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/
Cellphone information: http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/cell/
Libretto information: http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/portable/
Linux Printing HOWTO: http://www.picante.com/~gtaylor/pht/
------------------------------
From: Richard Caley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 25 Feb 1999 18:07:49 +0000
In article <7b2tjo$7l7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Patrick M Hausen (pmh) writes:
pmh> The main point of all this reasoning is: people, please be aware of
pmh> the implications of the GPL. It takes away rights from
pmh> developers.
Sorry, but I don't see this. Taking something and putting it under GPL
gives people more rights. That it doesn't give them as many rights as
a BSD style licence doesn't mean it takes away rights.
Otherwise we'd have to say the BSD licence takes away rights becasue
it doesn't grant the freedom that would come if the `something' was
put into the public domain.
And, after all, if you want to do something non-GPL with it, all you
have to do is ask the people who did the work. Is that so terrible?
--
Mail me as rjc not [EMAIL PROTECTED] _O_
|<
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
