Linux-Misc Digest #215, Volume #19 Sat, 27 Feb 99 19:13:07 EST
Contents:
Re: More bad news for NT ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Looking for a cross-compiler ("Duane Elmer Smeckert")
Re: Pentium III Boycott and survey info (Jimmie R. Farmer)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (jik-)
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. ("The Infernal One")
Re: Anti-Virus for Linux (John Thompson)
disk otpimization & defragmentat? (Peter Schr�mbges)
Re: Problem while booting linux through LILO or boot-disk (Keith)
Re: GGI (Re: Porting svgalib to FreeBSD) (baram)
Re: RH5.1 Installation problem - fs type iso9660 not supported by kernel (Gwenael
Delaine)
Re: RH vs SuSE ("Robert C. Paulsen, Jr.")
Re: sed? 'nuff said. ("Graham K. Glover")
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (finished!)
Re: _Good_ (support 5+ systems) Monitor/Mouse/Keyboard switch for pc... (Yan Seiner)
Can Linux run on NT for stability? (moi)
Re: Anti-Virus for Linux (Richard Steiner)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.linux
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Date: 27 Feb 1999 20:00:15 GMT
In the sacred domain of comp.os.linux.misc didst David Hawthorne
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> eloquently scribe:
: that I can't appreciate what they've done for me in allowing me to get some
: knowledge of PC computing usage - that, after all, is most likely the way
: that most of us first got into computing and therefore Linux.
Not me, thankfully.
My start was 1982 on a lowly little speccy. Then upgraded to a QL. Stuck
with that, and indeed still have it.
Then came to uni, and started using Sun Unix.
Then got an old 486 off a friend, formatted the hard drive and installed
linux.
How many of us
: started with Linux as our first OS?
QDOS (QL Drive Operating System) was mine. Multitasked in 1984 better than
windoze 95 does now....
--
______________________________________________________________________________
|[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: "Duane Elmer Smeckert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Looking for a cross-compiler
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 14:48:04 -0800
I suspect that you are asking a different question than you think.
A cross compiler is used to generate code for one computer
on another computer. For example, it is possible to compile an
image for Motorola 68K processors on an Intel PC.
I think you are simply asking for a Linux C++ compiler, which
(I thing) gcc handles quite well.
javierlt wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>I�m looking for a cross-compiler for C++
>Any help will be apreciated.
>
>Thanks
>
>--
>for answer leave xxx in my email
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jimmie R. Farmer)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Pentium III Boycott and survey info
Date: 26 Feb 1999 22:11:39 GMT
In article <7b6uci$1t1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
John Meissen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Boycott Swintel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Pentium III chip with the individual serial number that can
>>track your web surfing and buying habits can now have the ID number
>>turned on and off by software.
>
>This is untrue. The fact is, the feature can be disabled with software,
>but it can ONLY be turned back on by a full hardware reset.
Think again, young Jedi:
http://www.heise.de/ct/english/99/05/news1/
Excerpt:
[...] The processor manufacturer appeased with the guarantee, the user would
have full control whether he would allow the read-out of the serial number.
Once switched off, the corresponding processor command could not be activated
until the next cold start.
This description has proved wrong. The processor expert of c't
magazine, Andreas Stiller, has figured out a procedure to switch on the
command for reading out the serial number by software. This procedure is
based on specific features of the system architecture that are documented.
They would have got around in cracker circles sooner or later. A spokesperson
from Intel confirmed upon inquiry by c't, that the serial number can be
re-activated this way.
You have been warned.
Sincerely,
Jimmie Farmer
--
Jimmie Farmer | It is by the fortune of God that, in this country,
Techno Geek/Musician | we have three benefits: freedom of speech, freedom
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | of thought, and the wisdom never to use either.
http://www.malchick.com/ | -- Mark Twain
------------------------------
From: jik- <[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: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 14:54:48 -0800
> So, would you be so kind and explain to me how was I completely exploited
> by the first piece of code and living in dignity and financial security
> by the other ?
I don't think the point being made applies so much to the origional
author as to people who want to include that persons code into thier
own. Least that is what I get from the conversation so far.
The only way the origional author is getting jipped, is if he believes
that the GPL is the Right(tm) thing to do, without looking into the
other licences. I am sure that many take GPL at face value, and leave
it at that....there is a lot of "If your not using GPL, your doing a Bad
thing." stuff out there, especially from the FSF. Read thier site, they
are anti-everyone but GNU.
With GPL, you HAVE to GPL anything which uses any amount of code from a
GPLed application. This would make life harder on someone who was
working on something, saw some code you made which does something he
needs, in a way that probably could not be improved upon....or would
just plain take much much time, which he could use doing the rest.
Now with the GPL, he would be forced (and the word forced does apply
here) to GPL his new application simply because it uses some code from
yours. This is not the case with other 'free' licences, GPL stands out
here.
Also, it applies to the person who so much enhances your code, that %50
or more is new,...so really it is a new application, not the origional
which you produced. Here again, under the GPL, he would have to GPL the
new code as well. He can't even keep yours under GPL and his as
something else, and distribute them together.....
What if this person doesn't like the GPL? He would be forced to either
use it against his will, or not use ANY of your code. How does that
promote advancement?
In trying to forceably remove commercial development from the picture,
the GPL has put quite a kink in the hose. This anti-commercialism
appears to be the TRUE goal of the FSF, from thier licence, and from
thier webpage....they radiate a hate for money and people who make money
more then they do freedom,...even though they speak so highly of the
latter. They are even against using GNU software to develop proprietery
software (as in the OS and devel tools, not the libs and such)...now
they want to have us make GPLed libraries instead of LGPLed ones, so
that NOONE but redistributers can make any money....which is the basis I
think for the anti-GNU sentiment.
------------------------------
From: "The Infernal One" <[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 14:03:47 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Maybe I say this because I've used Windows for as long as it's been
>out, but I don't find Windows cryptic at all. Actually, I find it
>pretty obvious-- and I have found that I can sit a new user (*completely
>new user*) in front of a Windows box and say, "Look at this.
>Don't ask me a single question, and poke around for yourself," and they'll
>typically start to figure things out without documentation. That means
>(to me, anyway) that it's not cryptic.
I'm not sure if that would be the case. Some completely new
users have a hard time with mouse control, buttons, and tend
to mess up things without knowing on either system. I've
been there, both with Linux and Windows (DOS) and neither
was particularly harder. Although I personally find Windows
a lot easier because I haven't had much chance to use Linux,
this has little to do with the nature of the UI.
>Can you do that with UNIX? Not really. A newbie wouldn't think in terms
>of "cp" = "copy", "mv" = "rename and move" and so on.
You're comparing Unix CLI and Windows GUI. Not fair at all.
I've used X86free in 1995 when it was much worse than its
current form and I could do a lot of things without looking
at documentation. Windows was about as hard.
>>For those who simply try to use a computer that others' are
>>maintaining (corporate/school environment) neither Linux nor
>>Windows poses much trouble. When it comes to maintainance,
>>Windows is often harder because of its instability, registry,
>>among other things.
>That's why I don't fuck around with Windows on my home machine anymore.
And if you decide not to mess around with the OS, Linux is
still easier because Windows 95/98 generally requires periodical
messing around to maintain its stability to an acceptable level.
I'm not sure if it's fixed yet but the registry in Windows 95
has a tendency to grow and is not compressed when entries were
removed.
>>>DOS, UNIX, etc., are for those who want to learn (except DOS only takes
>>>maybe a day to learn...).
>>Windows takes months to learn for a complete newbie. DOS
>>takes a day to learn? Have you ever had to play with memory
>>managers because your favorite game wouldn't run due to its
>>outrageous conventional memory requirement? Do you expect
>>newbies to handle config.sys/autoexec.bat?
>Nope-- the DOS 6.22 memory manager worked just fine for all the games
>I ever played/setup. MemMaker actually did a quite nice job doing all
>of that for me... and MemMaker can be found in the DOS 6.2 HELP program,
>which people who use DOS try first... (pretty obvious to try HELP first,
>right?).
MemMaker doesn't always optimize well and I had to learn
the intricacies of manual finetuning of config.sys and
autoexec.bat to play some games. Even worse, MemMaker
could trash the configurations files under certain
circumstances. Things are even more complicated if one
wanted to play the Dos games in Windows 3.x.
That is not to mention the number of problems with the
trashed swap file Win 3.1 used to have, which sometimes
required reinstallation (or manual editing of INI files)
to solve. At least Windows 95 was more robust in the
sense that it usually boots to a GUI state before it
eats itself.
>As far as CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT-- that's always been like the
>Windows registry is today-- typical users didn't edit those types of
>things because PC World and other computer magazines always carried
>hefty warnings about editing CONFIG.SYS and AUTOEXEC.BAT.
Typical users didn't edit those things, just in the sense
that Unix users don't necessarily have to write shell
scripts or edit complicated configuration files to do
their task. The same amount of knowledge of course
corresponds to the same amount of expertise, although
in Dos/Windows you quickly get to reach the upper boundary
posed by the buggy, inconsistent, amd weak nature of the
system
>Not really. It took me six months to learn Windows, in and out, keyboard
>shortcuts, everything. Version 3.1, that is. Windows 95 took me about
>a month to master, because many of the key shortcuts weren't changed. The
>menus and windows make more sense in their layout.
>I've been working with Linux now for about 2 years, and guess what? I'm
>FAR from getting it all down.
>
>Sure, I've got my video card working in X, and I've learned about
>/etc/fstab and /etc/lilo.conf, and /etc/rc.d/*. But there are tons of
>things that I've not learned, some I know of and some I don't. For
>example, I know enough about cp, mv, gzip, tar, bzip2, ps, ls, and grep
>to use them for what I'd like. But I don't know anything about sed and
>awk, other than the fact that they exist. Never learned emacs (although
>I use cvim and am pretty happy with it). Still learning *TONS* on Linux.
There are more things to learn in typical Unix systems, but
that doesn't mean that more knowledge is required to reach
the same level of usability.
>Windows does not require the same amount of effort/knowledge/expertise
>because an idiot can sit down, and if they think a teeny bit, can figure
>it out.
I feel that you're far overestimating the aptitude of
computer illiterates.
------------------------------
From: John Thompson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Anti-Virus for Linux
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 11:16:21 -0600
Todd Knarr wrote:
>
> Brian Donovan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi, I was wondering if there is any anti-viral utilities available for
> > linux. I'm at college with ethernet and like the biological type computer
> > viruses tend to pass rather quick. Thanks for your help,
>
> There aren't really any AV packages for Linux. Mostly that's because:
> a) there aren't really any viruses for Linux. There was one combination
> virus/worm written as a demonstration, but it never propagated very
> far. That's the only one I've heard of. Since Linux uses a completely
> different executable format and system-call API from DOS and Windows,
> DOS/Windows viruses can't propagate to Linux.
> b) a virus can't really infect a Linux system easily. If you normally
> run as an ordinary user, any virus you download can only infect the
> files you own. It can't touch the main system files, which are owned
> by root and not writable by anyone else. The same protections that
> keep users from stomping on files belonging to the system or other
> users also sharply limit what a virus can do, keeping them from
> spreading and infecting the system.
But for a linux system acting as a mail or file server for
Windows clients, a native scanner program might be useful in
detecting viruses in the mail spool or elsewhere that might
otherwise be propogated to the Windows machines. I realize
that the Windows client machines could each have their own
scanner to deal with this, but from an administrative
viewpoint it might be easier to handle such things
centrally. I'm sure you know what users are capable of
doing to their machines...
--
-John ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
------------------------------
From: Peter Schr�mbges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: disk otpimization & defragmentat?
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 09:51:44 +0100
I guess there is something like defrag for ext2 though I think you can
do very well without it....in contrast to FAT-filesystems#
Holger
> -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Stefano Piccarolo [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Ver�ffentlicht am: Donnerstag, 25. Februar 1999 09:21
> Im Ordner: misc
> Unterhaltung: disk otpimization & defragmentat?
> Betreff: disk otpimization & defragmentat?
>
> Is there any utility to optimize disk access speed by defragmenting
> the
> files?
>
> OS used:
> Linux RedHat
> Two HD drives each with its own OS, interchangeable
>
> Thank you in advance
> Stefano
> EMail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Keith)
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware,cmu.comp.os.linux,cmu.cs.linux.forum
Subject: Re: Problem while booting linux through LILO or boot-disk
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 23:00:50 GMT
Read the BootPrompt HOWTO
> 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: baram <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: GGI (Re: Porting svgalib to FreeBSD)
Date: 27 Feb 1999 22:10:18 GMT
In comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc WHS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What we need is the OS specific adaptations for FBSD to use the KGI
> (kernel part of GGI) drivers etc. If you want to get KGI running on
> FBSD, please join the GGI mailing list (the user library libggi should
> work already on X for FBSD).
Hi, has anyone succesufully compiled/used libggi on FreeBSD? :)
Alex
------------------------------
From: Gwenael Delaine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RH5.1 Installation problem - fs type iso9660 not supported by kernel
Date: 27 Feb 1999 22:31:27 GMT
> fs type iso9660 not supported by kernel.
Then the problem is in your Kernel. Are you sure you installed the file
type in your Kernel.
I installed RH5.1 and everything went ok. However, you may need to
recompile your Kernel and ensure that the iso9660 is included (either in
the kernel or as a module).
By the way, I suppose you installed RH5.1 from a CDRom, so it the
insatllation kernels work.
> I have added the following lines to both the /etc/mtab and /etc/fstab
files:
>
> /dev/cdrom /mnt/cdrom iso9660 noauto,ro 0 0
> /dev/hdc /mnt/cdrom iso9660 noauto,ro 0 0
That will not help until your kernel recognizes the fs type. I would
suggest recompiling the kernel. If someone suggests a better way, please
let me know.
> Also, if I would download the updated kernel from the internet, how can i
> update my system accordingly ?
There are plenty of How to Files in most distributions that explain step by
step what you have to do. Read them carefully and you should find most of
the answers you are looking for.
Remember that Linux is complex and needs time. I personally enjoy as much
learning how to make it work than just watching it work.
Good luck.
Sincerely,
Gwenael Delaine
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: "Robert C. Paulsen, Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RH vs SuSE
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 17:11:23 -0600
Jerry Lynn Kreps wrote:
>
> "Robert C. Paulsen, Jr." wrote:
> >
> > Jason S Hackney wrote:
> > >
> > > I am very new to Linux. Just installed two days ago. I saw a copy of
> > > SuSE in the store a while ago, but chose to install Red Hat 4.2 (which I
> > > bought about a year ago). I'm considering switching to SuSE because I
> > > don't care much for the software that shipped with RH 4.2. Can anyone
> > > tell me a bit about SuSE? Is it worth my trouble? Has anyone had any
> > > problems with it? I am also going to need to install my 3c905B NIC --
> > > I've had trouble getting RH to recognize it, but I think that's a user
> > > error on my part.
> >
> > The 3C905B is supported by SuSE, and by just about any recent
> > distribution, I think.
> >
> > >
> > > I would appreciate any advice availalble. I'm sure this has been
> > > discussed in the past so I don't mind if anyone emails me at
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > Thanks so much.
> > > -Jason
> >
> > Be sure to get the new SuSE 6.0. Some places may still have 5.3 on the
> > shelf.
> >
> > I have tried the following distributions (in this order):
> >
> > Red Hat 4.2 (some time ago when this was the newest)
> > Slackware 3.6
> > SuSE 5.3
> > Red Hat 5.2
> > SuSE 6.0
> >
> > So far, I like SuSE 6.0 the best by a pretty good margin. It's install
> > process seems to be the best organized and easiest to deal with. It has
> > the biggest selection of software included with the distribution. For
> > example, RedHat doesn't have KDE, StarOffice, nor even diald.
> >
> > I have had three problems with SuSE 6.0:
> >
> > 1. The Applix demo gets an error trying to import Office95 files. SuSE's
> > web page acknowledges the problem but doesn't yet offer a fix.
> >
> > 2. smbumount fails. I just installed the 5.3 version and all is OK.
> >
> > 3. the egcs 1.1 compiler isn't configured right. I didn't bother trying
> > to figure it out. Instead I installed the 1.1.1 version from the
> > Cygnus/egcs site and it works OK.
> >
> > --
> > Robert Paulsen http://paulsen.home.texas.net
>
> I started with RH5.0 and then moved up to RH5.2.
> RH is ok, I guess, but it requires a lot of manual work to install and
> remove programs.
What scared me during the RH instalation process was when it suggested I
print out text file indicating what was installed for my future
reference. Made me realize how well SuSE has this organized. It keeps
track of things for you, and as you mention below, not just what is
installed, but all the configuration involved -- plus it can back
anything out if you want.
> One of the problems I had was with rpm (which is not
> specific to RH) on RH. An rpm package didn't update itself when it was
> installed. So, try to query or uninstall an installed package and it
> says it is not installed (the rpm package enternal update fails during
> install) but try to install it and it says it is installed (because it
> consulted the rpm database). Also, after installing an rpm package you
> still have to go to all the Xwindows clients and add the package to the
> menus, etc...
> Additionally, the various packages appeared to be merely added to the
> CDROM, relying on rpm to check for dependencies during install (if they
> are installed). This didn't bother me because I am a geek who has been
> working on computers since 1962 (that's not a type - have you ever
> "programmed" an IBM 402 tablualtor?
Yes, in 1966. Guess that mekes me a youngster by your standards! I
worked a summer job in a "unit records" department at IBM Poughkeepsie
at that time. Used sorters, collators, punches, and some other things I
can't remember the names of (1401?). I do remember messing with those
plug-boards.
> 8,000lbs of iron. That's why the
> old main frames later became known as 'heavy iron').
> I read about SuSE and it's YaST (Yet another System Tool) utility
> program and bought a subscription to SuSE, beginnning with 5.3, for
> $34US. I was more than pleasently supprised. Quality German
> engineering is an understatement. The 400+ page manual is well worth the
> price of the distro alone. The 5 CDROM's contain the SuSE distro on
> three, a live system on the fourth, and the most recent of nearly every
> GPL app on the internet that is worth downloading and many commercial
> ones. They aren't just thrown on the CD. YaST runs specific scripts
> for each one which does the install, creates the environmental
> variables, updates .profile, profile, boot.local, rc.config, etc., and
> also goes to each of the Xclients and updates their config files to make
> the app appear in their menu structures. If you uninstall an app all of
> that stuff is reversed. And, you don't have to reboot your system,
> which is the case with most Linux distros, after you run YaST.
> The most recent version of SuSE is 6.0. It contains the 2.0.36 kernel
> and is glibc6, but you can also install the older glibc5 libraries if
> you wish (I did) so you can run software that uses either library
> series. The next release of SuSE will contain the newer kernel, 2.2.x
> and if SuSE's performance is any gauge, everything will be taylored
> together nicely.
> Am I a SuSE enthusiast? ;-)
> Jerry
I certainly agree about the "German engineering" that went into SuSE.
I'll put up with the occasional text in German, and put up with the
English versions of some things on their web pages being a little
down-level or incomplete.
Those who worry about Red Hat becomming the next Microsoft haven't seen
SuSE!
--
Robert Paulsen http://paulsen.home.texas.net
If my return address contains "ZAP." please remove it. Sorry for the
inconvenience but the unsolicited email is getting out of control.
------------------------------
From: "Graham K. Glover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: sed? 'nuff said.
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 15:46:07 -0500
Harry wrote:
>
> Out of sheer stubborness I'm trying to write a sed script to filter
> my e-mail archive. I could have written the thing by now in C, but
> I've started with sed and I'm not giving up.
:-) Good for you!
> Can someone explain the use of curly braces in sed? I've tried using
> them as you'd use them in C, but keep gettina an "unmatched "{"
> error".
>
> Ta much,
>
> Harry
Here's the latest sedfaq:
http://www.cornerstonemag.com/sed/sedfaq.html
This will give you some insight. Also, go to the Gnu homepage,
http://www.gnu.org/
and get the free documentation on Gnu awk, or gawk.
Depending on how you're using them, the curly braces are a part of what
are called "regular expressions". In Windows, you get "*" for
wildcarding. In UNIX/Linux, you get a world of ways to generally
describe fields et al.
I must confess I wrote my first sed and awk commands last week. Here
are a couple samples:
sed 's/[ -~]\{1,9\} //; / / s/ .*//' tz_hi > tz_hi_test
awk '{if ($2 > $1) print $1, $2; else {print $2, $1}}' t1 > t2
Both are one-liners, in case you find them wrapped to two.
The first one is a double edit. First, it takes the first nine
printable characters and the space character and replaces them with
nothing. The second searches for a space character, and says take the
space character and "greedily" take everything following and replace
them with nothing. Do this to each line in tz_hi and write to
tz_hi_test.
The second says, if fields one and two are in increasing order, write
them in that order; if they are not, then write them in reverse order.
Input is t1, output goes to t2.
sed and awk are extremely powerful, as are grep/fgrep, sort, and uniq.
Together, a short bash script of said (or sed?!) commands reduced a
bunch of 80MB data files to 80KB information files.
More and more I become supremely impressed with this operating
environment.
Good luck and have fun!!!!!!!!!!
--
Graham
Latest home desktop:
http://www.erols.com/grahamkg/linux.gif
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (finished!)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class.
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 23:05:18 GMT
Linux blows. Amen brother!
Long live big bill!
Wed, 24 Feb 1999 18:18:11 +0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias
Warkus) wrote:
>It was the Tue, 23 Feb 1999 22:53:31 -0500...
>..and Chris Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> How about LucasArts games? Why do they need sooooo much power to run?
>> Why does Rebellion need more PC than Quake? It's graphics aren't
>> better. It isn't a 3d live action game. Who knows? Even back in the
>> day, you had to have a special boot disk to free up enough memory to
>> play X-Wing or TieFighter (back before they were a single game).
>>
>> I wouldn't care if the games LOOKED like they used the power they
>> require.
>
>The problem is that most commercial games are written in a hurry. Two
>years maximum development. At the beginning of this period, you need
>to figure how powerful the hardware will be when the game comes out.
>Write for this hardware.
>
>If the game isn't state-of-the-art or ahead of the state of the art at
>release, you're seriously fscked. Look at Enemy Nations - the game was
>written from 1994 till 1996 [something like that]. They predicted when
>it would come out, a normal computer would have got 64 MB of RAM. They
>missed by two years.
>
>A good example for a game that took a long time to write, runs on
>pretty much lower-end hardware and looks good nevertheless (not to
>mention it's complex and intelligent, too), is I-War.
>
>mawa
>--
>Every woman and every man should at least try to keep in mind through
>their whole life just how incredibly bad one is able to feel during
>puberty.
> -- mawa
------------------------------
From: Yan Seiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.admin.networking,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.video,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.misc
Subject: Re: _Good_ (support 5+ systems) Monitor/Mouse/Keyboard switch for pc...
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 17:39:55 -0500
A PS/2 mouse is a crippled serial port mouse, no more or less. A few bucks will
get you an adapter.
Yan
Michael Meissner wrote:
> 2) it only handles
> ps/2 mice (not serial).
------------------------------
From: moi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Can Linux run on NT for stability?
Date: 26 Feb 1999 12:15:49 -0800
I have found my NT server very reliable, and want to run Linux on it. Is this
possible? I know some people say Linux is stable, but I don't want to take a
chance.
moi
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner)
Subject: Re: Anti-Virus for Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 16:27:22 -0600
Here in comp.os.linux.misc, Gerald Willmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
spake unto us, saying:
>how exactly do the get to the boot sector before linux boots ???
>or did you mean dual-boot systems are the only ones at risk ???
If you have an infected floppy disk in the drive, and if you haven't
disabled floppy booting, the BIOS will try to run the bootstrap code
which resides on the floppy, and that'll infect your box.
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
OS/2 + Linux (Slackware+RedHat+SuSE) + FreeBSD + Solaris + BeOS +
WinNT4 + Win95 + PC/GEOS + MacOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven!
In the words of the car dealers, "they all do that".
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
