Linux-Misc Digest #237, Volume #19 Sun, 28 Feb 99 21:13:12 EST
Contents:
Re: special characters in UNIX how? (Bev)
Re: SCSI Incompatibility ("tonni")
SCSI Incompatibility ("Ray York")
Re: Linux/FreeBSD compatability (Was Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)) (Patrick M.
Hausen)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) ("JACK")
Re: D-Link DE-220PCT ehternet card driver? (Donald)
Re: Linux/FreeBSD compatability (Was Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)) (Gregory L.
Hansen)
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (jedi)
Re: Books about linux ("JACK")
Re: What if software could think? (brian moore)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (jik-)
Re: What if software could think? (jik-)
Re: special characters in UNIX how? (Gene Wilburn)
Re: Can't login to linux from anywhere, must reboot? ("JACK")
Re: Linux+Creative CD-ROM (Douglas E. Mitton)
Re: FreeAgent for Linux (Jacek Pop�awski)
running executables from cdrom? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Tim Smith)
Re: Win95 vs. Win98 and Linux (Bev)
Re: More bad news for NT (jedi)
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (jedi)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Bev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: special characters in UNIX how?
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:05:08 -0800
Gerald Willmann wrote:
>
> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Joel Wijngaarde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > >does somebody know how you can do special charters in Linux like an 'e'
> > >or an 'u' with two points on top. In Windows such things are done with
> > >the ALT xxx keys.
>
> can work the same way on the linux console, call the following .inputrc
> set metaflag on
> set convert-meta off
> set output-meta on
> and put it in your home directory.
> Gerald
And here's a REALLY crude, quick and dirty way that sometimes works -- cut
and paste from the following list:
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
� � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
Better than nothing :-)
--
Cheers,
Bev
*****************************************
"Don't force it, use a bigger hammer!"
--M. Irving
------------------------------
From: "tonni" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: SCSI Incompatibility
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 01:16:59 GMT
well it not the scsi card it is the hd and scsi cd wont mount i had the same
problem it find the board but wont talk to devices
solution get 5.2 it works fine in my scsi setup adaptec 2940 uw toshiba 32x
plextor writer 4x12 seagate hawk uw3
Ray York <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7bck75$hce$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> I am trying to install RH5.1 and I just discovered that my SCSI Controller
> (Adaptec AHA-2940U/AHA-2940UW PCI SCSI Controller) is not compatible. Is
> there anything that I can do, besides getting RH5.2, that will make this
> thing work? thanks for your help!
>
> ray at nwnexus dot com
>
>
------------------------------
From: "Ray York" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: SCSI Incompatibility
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 15:41:43 -0800
I am trying to install RH5.1 and I just discovered that my SCSI Controller
(Adaptec AHA-2940U/AHA-2940UW PCI SCSI Controller) is not compatible. Is
there anything that I can do, besides getting RH5.2, that will make this
thing work? thanks for your help!
ray at nwnexus dot com
------------------------------
From: Patrick M. Hausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
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: 28 Feb 1999 10:32:09 GMT
In comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Graffiti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm sure those people would be more than happy to learn how to write
> portable code. All they have to do is spend $100000e^inf on a few
> UNIX workstations so they can run Solaris, HP/UX, SCO, AIX, MVS (Yes,
> it has UNIX branding), SINIX, ....
Well, then give me a reason, why Staroffice for Linux reads /proc/cmdline,
which supposedly contains the program's command line arguments?
I mean, using argv[] would have been black magic ... ;-)
This single silly thing causes lot's of work if you want to run that
application on a Linux-ABI-compatible system. Or the system folks
end up reimplementing Linux /proc - *argh*.
Staroffice 5 now uses Linux clone(), heaven knows what for. So that, too,
had to be reimplemented in the FreeBSD Linux ABI.
These things just go on and on, I assume, Stardivision _want_ their code
to run on Linux only. That's akin to Software that runs perfectly on
FreeBSD but comes with an install routine, that won't run unless uname
returns something with "Linux" in it.
IMHO Linux is the big garbage can of needless reimplementations and
"hack before design" interfaces - but that's only my personal opinion.
Regards,
Patrick
------------------------------
From: "JACK" <[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: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 01:18:59 -0000
the best free unix is the one where its users do not get involved with
meaningless arguments. that others have to download at a price
j
------------------------------
From: Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: D-Link DE-220PCT ehternet card driver?
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 21:39:34 -0500
Edward Nather wrote:
> I picked up a D-Link DE-220PCT ethernet card, after checking that the
> D-Link 220 was listed as supported by Linux in the Ethernet.HOWTO.
> However, the pre-configured kernel for RedHat 5.2 doesn't see it, so
> I guess it is a bit different -- its manual says it is NE-2000
> compatible. It is, however, a Plug-n-Pray device, and Windows 95
> recognizes it OK. Networking is enabled in the kernel, but I when
> I load RH 5.2 and try to configure it as a NE-2000, it is not found.
>
> Can anyone help me find a driver (kernel module) that will work?
>
> Thanks,
>
> ed
I have the same card and here is what I did: get the latest drivers from
dlink.com, decompress it to a floppy, then reboot your comp in dos mode.
Run setup.exe and simply turn off PnP. Make sure you write down the i/o
and irq #s. Install Linux and choose NE2000 and then specify the i/o and
irqs.
That should do it.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gregory L. Hansen)
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: 28 Feb 1999 23:16:48 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Type mount with no options. Example output:
>
>[mtrausch@dialup-1-15-pb mtrausch]$ mount
>/dev/hda3 on / type ext2 (rw)
>none on /proc type proc (rw)
>/dev/hda1 on /mnt/w95 type vfat (rw)
Oh, thanks, that might help.
>
>On 28 Feb 1999 03:43:48 GMT, Gregory L. Hansen
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>>brian moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On 27 Feb 1999 12:10:33 -0800,
>>> david parsons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It's easier to get to the information that it is if that information
>>>> is only in a system call. If all the kernel information is locked
>>>> up behind a system call, it's somewhat difficult to get at it from
>>>> a shellscript.
>>>
>>>Indeed, and especially with the One True Editor, 'cat'. :)
>>>
>>>> Of course, Linux also DOESN'T have a devfs in the mainline kernel
>>>> because the core team thinks that having the kernel accurately
>>>> report devices is icky.
>>>
>>>You mean like Solaris's /devices directories? Icky is too nice for that
>>>mess.
>>
>>This is something I've wondered about. I've mounted floppies under
>>Linux, and I had to tell the OS what the device is called (but first I had
>>to ask the guy who set up the computer, because I didn't know) and I had
>>to tell it what the file system was.
>>
>>When I'm doing that sort of thing on my Mac, I run a disk utility and it
>>TELLS me what devices I have on my computer, the file formats on all the
>>partitions, and if they're writeable (e.g. the CD-ROM is not). When I
>>stick a floppy in the drive it will automatically mount, and the icon will
>>have a "PC" on it if it's DOS formatted.
>>
>>I have to assume Linux is capable of things like that. Is there some
>>handy utility that I don't know about?
>>
>
>
>--
>=====================================================================
>Michael B. Trausch [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>V: (419) 838-8104 F: (815) 846-9374
> ICQ UIN: 32369835
> "Curiosity is the very basis of education and if you tell me that
> curiosity killed the cat, I say only the cat died nobly."
> - Arnold Edinborough
>
>If you do not have my public PGP key, you are encouraged to obtain it
>from my website at http://www.wcnet.org/~mtrausch/mykey.zip. You need
> to have PGP 5.0i or newer to use the key.
>=====================================================================
>
------------------------------
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: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:16:36 -0800
On 28 Feb 1999 09:06:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 27 Feb 1999 07:09:42 -0700, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>Oh? So the said user just *accidentally* types in
>>
>> IEXPLORE.EXE
>>
>>and the web browser starts up?
>>
>>Oh? They clicked an icon? Then why are you comparing this to the
>>UNIX shells (I'll take any UNIX shell over DOS any day)?
>
>I'm stating the ease of learning factor which is overly more apparent
>in Windows than it is in UNIX.
>
>>
>>You haven't used Linux in the last couple years, have you. (and UNIX
>>doesn't automatically assume that people are so stupid to *not*
>>understand such "cryptic" commands like cp and mv)
>>
>
>You've got tons of documentation for Linux and UNIX, but what you don't
>have is something that says, "Need help? Click here" or a tip that shows
>up on the screen that says, "Type help for information on how to use UNIX."
You don't have that on Windows either. You just have to stumble
across it on either system. On Windows (vs. Redhat X) it just
happens to be nested less deep.
>
>Therefore, in the perspective of a new user, it's automatically hard to
>use. Which is very true; for power, you trade ease of learning.
>
>>> 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?).
>>
>>Ever try it in DOS 7 (Win 95)?
>
>Tried. Didn't work. So I made a DOS 6.22 boot disk. (The memory manage-
>ment in Windows 95 for DOS level things is *really* shitty, considering
>the fact that everything is tied down to that 640K barrier).
>
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>>And it is so much easier than Linux?
>>
>
>Two files to configure your system as opposed to more. In Linux you have
More files vs. needing to tweak locations and sizes within
three types of memory manually (as memmaker only goes so far)
while still maintaining enough of each such that all of your
programs will run.
>start up scripts, you have configuration files in /etc, and more. You'd
>be lying if you said it was just as easy in Linux to configure as it is
>in Windows.
>
>>What a crock.
>>
>>> 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.
>>
>>Sed and awk are available for Windows as well.
>>Does this mean you still don't know Windows?
>>
>
>Windows comes with "user-friendly" utilities. Power-hungry users want
>the tools that will give them that power-- sed and awk are those tools.
...nothing really like sed or grep. Although Windows really
doesn't have analogs of either concept except perhaps in a
limited fashion, and only with the purchase of an application
suite (spreadsheet).
>
>It's funny, most Windows programmers seem to reinvent utilities all of
>the time that do *some* of the things that sed and awk do... hell, I
That's the key here 'reinvent all the time'.
[deletia]
--
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: "JACK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Books about linux
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 01:23:20 -0000
>While this is a very good book it is now showing its age and many new
>users do not find it as useful as it once was.
>
>I would recommend that new users take a look at SAMS Learn Linux in 24
>Hours.
>
a excelent book is Unix unleashed. even though it is not specific linux oo
beginners it gives lots of general info on unix and examples from
BSD\linux\solaris etc. this book should start you with everthing you need to
know and what questions you need to ask . there is also linux unleashed this
may be good aswell i do not know
j
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: What if software could think?
Date: 28 Feb 1999 23:44:01 GMT
On 28 Feb 1999 23:22:35 GMT,
Gregory L. Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> NF Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>John apparently thinks freedom means freedom. Why don't you?
> >>
> >You, and John, seem to think that your definition of freedom is
> >the only one. Somewhere the freedom to own private goods
> >and the freedom to appropriate other people's goods collide
> >head on.
> >
> >But the discussion wasn't about "freedom". It was about "free
> >software". Since GPL code is free for use, and will remain
> >free for use, it _is_ "free software".
>
> I.e. you don't have to pay any money for it. And you never will. Ever.
But you can sell GPL software just fine (look at Red Hat for an
example).
You just can't forbid others from doing it.
"Free Software" isn't like "free beer", it's like "Free Speech." The
GPL is to ensure that software will remain Free and that its source code
will not be withheld, nor will it's duplication and use require
licensing that the authors didn't agree to.
In the real world this usually makes for free (as in "free beer")
software as well, as it reduces the cost of distribution to bandwidth
and ability to burn CD's, which makes Red Hat's -real- product their
manuals, support and good will.
--
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: 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: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:14:12 -0800
Richard Steiner wrote:
>
> Here in comp.os.linux.misc, James Youngman
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> spake unto us, saying:
>
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro) writes:
> >
> >> Bullshit. GPL is *not* copyrighted.
> >
> >Read lines 4 to 7 of the GPL.
>
> It was my understanding that any text document has an inherent copyright
> (whether it's explicitly stated or not) from the point it is "embodied
> in a tangible medium" forward.
>
> To make something public domain, you have to explicitly state such.
True since the mid 1980s.
------------------------------
From: jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: What if software could think?
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:11:52 -0800
Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >I think that to be truely free, code has to be made so that people can
> >do what they want with it. If they want to steal another person's work
> >and make money from it, without adding anything of thier own,....they
> >WILL eventually be exposed as frauds. But forcing people into
> >submission is simply not the way to go...which is exactly what the FSF
> >wants to do, just read thier website on why we should stop using the
> >LGPL.
>
> If you're forced into submission, it's because you've willingly used GPL
> code. It's their code! Some of it wouldn't have been written at all if
> they didn't want free versions of existing products. Products that you
> wouldn't have had "free" access to, anyway.
True enough, the GPL does allow users to use the software...nothing can
disprove this because it is true. Wether or not a developer can also is
at dispute.
> Anyone complaing about not being able to use GPL code evidently
> won't give their own code out, either.
Entirely untrue. The point is that GPLed code cannot be used in free
software that is not also GPLed. This forces a person to either submit,
or not use the code....on the one hand, the perpetuate the GPL machine,
on the other...they are reinventing the weel....both solutions are bad
for everyone.
> The GPLers do give their code out
> for free, but with a few conditions attached. And they have as much right
> to demand their code is not restricted as Wolfram or John or anyone else
> has to restrict their work to paying customers and official developers. I
> don't see anyone complaining that they can't pull code out of Mathematica
> or AutoCAD. Why pick on GPL, except that they give so much more, and yet
> it's not quite within your reach?
Because the GPL tries to decieve us into thinking it is "free" software
(and to use what the FSF term as free) free as in freedom, not as in
money. That is simply untrue, and none of the others try to come off
like that.
>
> So to summarize, I say again that it's their friggin' code! They can do
> whatever the hell they want with it. They should be able to do whatever
> the hell they want with it, since they wrote it. Just as you can do
> whatever the hell you want to do with your own code. Any license is
> written to enforce an ideal, such as "I should get paid for my work."
> Their license is written to enforce a different ideal, but it covers their
> software, not yours.
Thats not the point, noone is disputing that fact either.
------------------------------
From: Gene Wilburn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: special characters in UNIX how?
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 01:41:23 GMT
If you only need them when you're editing, both vim and emacs make it
easy:
In vim, to get é type ^K ' e
In emacs, you set a couple of modes then hit the accent first followed
by the character. It's in the docs (I don't remember them off the top of
my head).
Gene
Joel Wijngaarde wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> does somebody know how you can do special charters in Linux like an 'e'
> or an 'u' with two points on top. In Windows such things are done with
> the ALT xxx keys.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Joel
>
> --
> Joel Wijngaarde (Physics student)
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
===================================================================
Gene Wilburn, Northern Journey Online, http://www.interlog.com/~njo
===================================================================
------------------------------
From: "JACK" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Can't login to linux from anywhere, must reboot?
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 01:31:01 -0000
>
>> Michael Mulvaney wrote:
>> > This happened twice over the weekend. Both times the computer worked
>> > fine for several hours, but after 12+ hours it would not allow me to
>> > login.
>>
and if you think thats weird
every so often i boot my machine and it comes up with xdm, but will not
let me login, and my kbd is forzen so i can't crtl-alt-delete, but if i
telnet into the machine and change the runlevel eg init 1 ; init 3 all is
fine
i is completely random i can find no pattern nor can i find any errors
in the log files
j
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Douglas E. Mitton)
Subject: Re: Linux+Creative CD-ROM
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 01:44:07 GMT
I have the same package ... the sound card is Plug-n-Play so it won't
be auto-magically recognized at boot. I moved my CD-ROM to the
motherboard IDE connector to get it to work. The one problem is that
you must check the CD-ROM master/slave jumper ... I had to change
mine. If it is on a connector alone it must be set as master.
I have installed a few different SlackWare versions ... the last was
3.6, I used the "bare.i" boot disk and my CD-ROM was immediately
recognized on the correct IDE port.
Just ask away if you have any questions.
DaStOp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am trying to set up Linux Slackware from a CD-ROM on a machine with a
>Creative CD-ROM originally connected via IDE to the Sound Blaster Card (one
>of those old multimedia kits that had the Sound card and the 4X CD-ROM, where
>the sound card works as a controller for the CD-ROM). But, I couldn't find
>the appropriate driver for the bootdisk...so I connected the CD-ROM directly
>to the motherboard on IDE, but I still cannot find the good bootdisk driver!
>Can someone help me please??? Thank you in advance for your collaboration! :)
>Da$top.
>
>----- O ----- O ----- O ----- O ----- O ----- O ----- O ----- O -----
>Check out these discussions lists:
>http://www.dejanews.com/~hiphopstyle/j.xp?j=hiphopstyle
>http://www.dejanews.com/~linuxandwindows/j.xp?j=linuxandwindows
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
================================================
Doug Mitton - Brockville, Ontario, Canada
'City of the Thousand Islands'
Amateur Radio: VE3DMZ ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.cybertap.com/dmitton
User Group: http://signals.rmc.ca/klug
SPAM Reduction: Remove "x." from my domain.
================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jacek Pop�awski)
Subject: Re: FreeAgent for Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 01:49:29 GMT
Rudy Taraschi wrote:
>The problem with this is that I read newsgroups with LOTS of traffic
>(this group being one of them). I would end up with 10% reading
>material and 90% filler. Under FreeAgent, I transfer the stuff I want
>to read from work to home on just one 1.44M floppy (compresses). I want
>to be able to tag only the headers I want to download, not all of them.
you can use suck - like me - and download only few newsgroups, and
create big killfile - to erase all non-interesting subject/persons,
then bzip2 all archive - transport to your home system - extract,
and send to INN
>2) run FreeAgent under Wine
>
>Beautiful idea,
i don't think so
if you use FA under Wine - you will still use Windows, you CAN'T write
scripts to play with your news, you can't do everything you can do
under Linux
>However, my home machine
>is a 486DX-25 laptop with 12MB of memory, and a 200MB harddisk. It
>rocks in console mode, but X is painful.
try use small WindowManager
don't use FVWM2 or KDE... try something smaller - like WindowMaker,
or maybe even BlackBox
>Sorry for bugging everyone, looks like I'm looking for an animal that
>doesn't exist.
you must risk - and try to forget about Agent
it is best newsreader under Windoze, but there are better ones under Linux
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: running executables from cdrom?
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 01:37:18 GMT
Hi there. I just burned my first cd. I used mkisofs to make the disk image,
and that program gives all files root group and user ownership. That
shouldn't be a problem, but anyway, when I mount the cd and try to run a
program which has these permissions: '-r-xr-xr-x 1 root root', I still get
a Permission denied error. Does anyone know why this is the case? Thanks for
any info. BTW, this is how I mount it (from my fstab):
/dev/cdrom /cdrom iso9660 noauto,ro,user 0 0
thanks again. please email me at [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-David
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.questions,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 28 Feb 1999 17:36:53 -0800
david parsons <o r c @ p e l l . p o r t l a n d . o r . u s> wrote:
> The GPL lets you modify the code it applies to, and Linus explicitly
> allows binary-only modules.
Linus does not have the power to make such an exception.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: Bev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Win95 vs. Win98 and Linux
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:41:38 -0800
Gerald Willmann wrote:
>
> On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > All views welcome, of course.
>
> my view on this is that a discussion of the relative merits of different
> M$ OSs does not belong in a linux newsgroup.
> Gerald
You mean YOU'D trust a M$ addict to give advice? I think the views of
linux users regarding which inferior OS they would prefer to use given that
they HAD to use one is a valid subject.
My opinion: Win95 is OK -- probably because I spent a lot of time on it
tweaking and adding useful tidbits. 98 seems operationally the same
but has too many cutesy features (like making everything look like a
browser window by default) that I couldn't get rid of in the few hours I
played with it on somebody else's machine. Win3.1 crashes easier than 95,
but editing .ini files is easier and less stressful than editing the
registry.
Come on, Gerald, be nice...
--
Cheers,
Bev
*****************************************
"Don't force it, use a bigger hammer!"
--M. Irving
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.linux
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:25:29 -0800
On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 20:46:06 GMT, Brian Hurt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"David Hawthorne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote many things,
>including:
>
>>Now this sort of attitude is exactly what pisses me off about Linux
>>newsgroups - 'Microsoft is worthless crap full stop'. Well, no, actually,
>>it's not. It has brought computing to the masses by providing an operating
>>system which does not require deep understanding on the part of the user.
>
>I thought the Mac had this distinction.
And Atari and Commodore and Digital Research and Geos...
--
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] (jedi)
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class.
Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:21:06 -0800
On 28 Feb 1999 17:41:24 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Sun, 28 Feb 1999 06:29:21 +0000, Colin Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>So use aliases, duh!
>
>Sure, and a newbie is going to think of that, right?
Why not? It is quite the analog of the device driver
and most likely what they would be told to go do when
asking about how to support some arbitrary device foo
on some irc channel or support webpage.
'recompiling the OS' is likely the last thing they
would try to do given that they are rather conditioned
against such things.
--
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
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
