Linux-Misc Digest #276, Volume #19 Wed, 3 Mar 99 06:13:14 EST
Contents:
Re: Passing Observation (David M. Cook)
Re: need help installing RH5.2 ("Michael Lee Yohe")
Re: Passing Observation ("Michael Lee Yohe")
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (Stefan Skoglund)
Wanted: linux theme screen background with a rocket by night (Christian Tsotras)
Re: How to change date for Unix/Linux? ("Maxim V. Sergeev")
Re: More bad news for NT (Harry)
Re: More bad news for NT (Michael Powe)
Re: Public license question (Michael Powe)
Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion (Ketil Z Malde)
Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?) (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Re: Wanted: linux theme screen background with a rocket by night ("Ron van
Middendorp")
Matrox Mystique G200 AGP under XFree86 (Sean Prest)
Re: ICQ in Linux (Fung Wai Keung)
Re: Public license question (Mark Mokryn)
Re: Create a DOS bootdisk in using only Linux (Walter Strong)
xcopilot: Bus error (Stef)
Re: how to find what library is needed to get this symbol? (mike)
AOL Instant Messanger (Neil Zanella)
Re: More bad news for NT (Harry)
Re: Backup software (Shane Steven Sturrock)
Re: Linux SLOWER than win95? (Shane Steven Sturrock)
Re: KDE and KOffice (Matthias Warkus)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
Subject: Re: Passing Observation
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 08:16:04 GMT
On 3 Mar 1999 04:53:22 GMT, SSAMOREZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hello , I was just reading some posts to this group. ( Just visiting ) . IMHO
>....... A comparison of say...... Windows 98 OS and Linux OS -any version- is
>like comparing apples to gyroscopes or something. There are drivers and there
>are mechanics. Windows (MS) was designed by programmers for non-programmers.
>Linux was designed by programmers for programmers.
The majority of Linux users are not programmers.
Dave Cook
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Michael Lee Yohe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Michael Lee Yohe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: need help installing RH5.2
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 02:16:09 -0600
>space to extract the packages. other than that i've not a clue.
>anyone?
I'm pretty sure your problem is that your DOS partition is not mounted
already.
***************************************************************************
* Michael Lee Yohe Office: TH N318 *
* UAH ASPIRE System Administrator Office: 256-890-6904 *
* UAH CS Assistant Administrator Home: 256-828-2667 *
* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.aspire.cs.uah.edu/mlyohe *
***************************************************************************
PGP public key can be found at http://www.aspire.cs.uah.edu/mlyohe/key.txt
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Michael Lee Yohe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Michael Lee Yohe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Passing Observation
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 02:15:25 -0600
>are mechanics. Windows (MS) was designed by programmers for
non-programmers.
>Linux was designed by programmers for programmers.
This is an absolute beautiful quote that I must post at work. I posted
about four months ago that Linux is not the operating system of the people
(to speak). Not everyone should use Linux (yet). And this quote wraps it
up in a nutshell.
There are many things about Linux that aren't yet qualified "user-friendly".
I would say the Linux 3.0 era will bring us even closer. Better hardware
configuration, etc.
Less tech support calls to me - the better.
***************************************************************************
* Michael Lee Yohe Office: TH N318 *
* UAH ASPIRE System Administrator Office: 256-890-6904 *
* UAH CS Assistant Administrator Home: 256-828-2667 *
* Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.aspire.cs.uah.edu/mlyohe *
***************************************************************************
PGP public key can be found at http://www.aspire.cs.uah.edu/mlyohe/key.txt
------------------------------
From: Stefan Skoglund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class.
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 00:01:49 +0100
Christopher Browne wrote:
> d) You might have other "servers" running to provide other services
> (rather like the way Hurd works).
>
> Rather than having a database system like Oracle or PostgreSQL running
> as tasks at the Linux level, they might be set up at the same level as
> the MkLinux "server," running as their own "kernel."
>
Which would be very interesting for any usage of pointer-swizzling
in for example object databases or relational ones to.
Hmm, it could be useful in emacs too.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christian Tsotras)
Subject: Wanted: linux theme screen background with a rocket by night
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 22:59:57 GMT
Hello.
I saw a screen background on a linux desktop that was a photography of
the lauching of a rocket by night near the sea, but I can't find it on
the net.
Could anybody help me to find it ?
Thanks.
--
Christian Tsotras -- Membre de PARINUX -- 0x3CCFC2C2
Paris Linux User Group : http://www.parinux.org/
FAQ Ol�ane DIAL : http://worldserver.oleane.com/chris/
------------------------------
From: "Maxim V. Sergeev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.admin,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: How to change date for Unix/Linux?
Date: 2 Mar 1999 20:54:31 GMT
> How does one change the date for a Unix/Linux machine? Answers
> will be greatly appreciated.
In the FreeBSD you can do
adjkernltz --- if wos not started before
date ... --- to correct system time
killall adjkernltz --- to write CMOS
Maxim V. Sergeev
------------------------------
From: Harry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 04:10:52 -0500
>Interesting. So it might actually be possible to create a CLI that
replaces Explorer. Like a bash port?<
Absolutely. But have you checked out Windows Scripting Host? It's a
mechanism that allows you to use plug-in scripting languages, much
as you'd use shell scripts in Unix. Available are vbscript,
javascript, ...
Harry
------------------------------
From: Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.linux
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Date: 02 Mar 1999 14:11:05 -0800
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
>>>>> "Massimo" == Massimo Signoretta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Massimo> David Hawthorne wrote:
>> 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. Your
Massimo> I agree. Dispite "This program has preformed an illegal
Massimo> op...." MS & Windows has brought something I that Linux
Massimo> does not have. EASE OF USE. A short time ago, I was
Massimo> bulilding computers as a sideline. I built several for a
Massimo> lawer friend. Although she knows nothing of dos prompts,
Massimo> partitinons and operating systems, she kicked my ass at
Massimo> Wordperfect 5.1. My point is that there are 2 types of
Massimo> computer experts, those that deal with the nuts and bolts
Massimo> of the computer, and those that USE the
Massimo> computer. Unfortunately, the later group is by far the
Massimo> largest. Win XX was written for this group not the
Massimo> former. I have RH 5.2, have installed it, and all the
Massimo> RMP that came with it. Now all I have to do is Figure out
Massimo> how to call them up. Whole new learning curve, and I
Massimo> understand computers. Until Linux becomes as simple to
Massimo> use as Win XX, and I repeat, USE, any superiority the
Massimo> operating system holds will go for naught. Understand I
Massimo> dislike, nay, abhor MS, but its far easier to use than
Massimo> Linux, and its ease of use, and marketing tactics, that
Massimo> make or break a system.
You're confusing two issues. Windows is not easier to learn than
linux.
First, Windows != WordPerfect. Linux != applications.
Second, the fact that your friend is well versed in WP does not prove
that WP is easy to learn (aren't you kind of being insulting to your
friend's intelligence with this claim?). It only proves that she
spent a lot of time learning to use it. As a former user of WP, I
know that it is NOT easy to learn -- but once learned, it's very
powerful.
It's fairly straightforward to learn to do two or three things with
your computer, no matter what OS you have on board. This condition
holds true for most users. Someone who spends 8 hours a day at work,
typing in WordPerfect and preparing some numbers of different kinds of
documents, will naturally over a period of time become quite expert at
doing this. That doesn't mean they learn anything about Windows --
and, indeed, in most cases they don't. When something goes haywire
with their unit, they punch a button on the phone and get the sysadmin
over there.
The only reason you find Windows "easier to use" than linux is because
you spent 10 times as much time learning to use it! Doh!
The `learning curve' problem people have in coming from Windows to
linux is that they've already spent oodles of time learning one
particular way of doing things -- the MS way. So, when they come to
linux, the `learning curve' includes a lot of "unlearning" of the old
ways of doing things. Of course it's easier to learn a spoken
language as a baby than it is as an adult. And adult learners of a
second spoken language exhibit the same kind of reactionary behavior
you exhibit: `why can't italian be more like english?'
Most computer users do not install and set up their OS. They either
use the machine at work or they buy one from an OEM with the OS
installed. If something goes wrong, they call tech support and have
someone on the phone walk them through the resolution; or they take it
to a shop. The "average user's" ability and desire to do diagnostics
and repair is limited.
IMNSHO, if you handed an OEM-built linux machine to a home user, with
the software already installed and set up, in the same way he would
get his Windows 98 machine from that OEM, that user will have no more
trouble "learning his OS" and learning to use his software than if the
machine had Win 98 on it instead. And he will not have any more problems
in dealing with diagnostic/reconfiguration issues than he would in Win
98 (considerably fewer, actually, since in linux there will be almost
no system-crashing problems).
mp
- --
Michael Powe Portland, Oregon USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.trollope.org
"Three hours a day will produce as much as a man ought to write."
-- Anthony Trollope
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: GnuPG v0.9.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Encrypted with Mailcrypt 3.5.1 and GNU Privacy Guard
iD8DBQE23GFu755rgEMD+T8RAhBgAJ4x6zozpnbybLEMVbZ2vkaZJuxPTQCfZHMR
Y0Hj3G83dFJC2Mb9VB8KM2k=
=b4rW
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
From: Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Public license question
Date: 02 Mar 1999 14:34:05 -0800
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
>>>>> "Rick" == Rick Onanian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > I'm afraid that, if they wanted to, MS could just take
>> Debian, > remove any references to GPL and remove all source
>> code, write > Microsoft all over it, sell it, and there is no
>> specific legal > ramification. Although, the linux community
>> would backlash and > it would flop... There's no law involved
>> in any of this, AFAIK.
>> Copyright law isn't law?
Rick> Please read more carefully. "I'm afraid that" means that I
Rick> fear what they could do.
>> That would be precisely as legal as duping Windows CD's: not.
>>
>> Please stop practicing law without training.
Rick> Correct me if I am wrong, but to obtain an actual copyright
Rick> on something, you have to register it with some authority?
Rick> Probably, some government?
Copyright is automatic. It's not a trademark or a patent, you don't
have to "register" it.
Rick> I have been told that you can copyright something simply by
Rick> saying copyright all over it, however, I don't know how that
Rick> would hold in a court of law.
It would. It does. It's the law. Copyright is implicit, you don't
even have to say "I copyright this."
Rick> That being said, how many parts of any given distribution of
Rick> Linux have real copyrights? I would venture to guess that
Rick> much of GPL'd software out there is not really copyrighted.
The GPL is a license. The copyright belongs to the author unless he
specifically assigns it to someone else.
mp
- --
Michael Powe Portland, Oregon USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.trollope.org
"Three hours a day will produce as much as a man ought to write."
-- Anthony Trollope
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: GnuPG v0.9.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Encrypted with Mailcrypt 3.5.1 and GNU Privacy Guard
iD8DBQE23Gc5755rgEMD+T8RAopfAKCQLTF+2zeECUjbW+xQWj1+v01BDgCcCrAp
UoqdNYy64Mf/hl2JkKXCPLE=
=9CFw
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion
From: Ketil Z Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 03 Mar 1999 11:24:23 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roger Espel Llima) writes:
>>> is that they are pretty hard to understand for someone who didn't
>>> learn functional programming from the beginning ie started to work
>>> with Basic,C or shudder C++.
>> They are not really that difficult to learn.
Unless you've been raised on C++. Contrariwise, C++ with its glorious
vtables, pure virtuals, statics, multiple inheritance, templates,
exceptions, rtti, is probably an endless source for puzzlement for
somebody brought up on functional languages.
>> As for the OSs, people have put ML on hardware, and have built
>> webservers in ML from the packet driver up.
Who, where?
> For most of my programming needs, give me a well-designed,
> very-high-level, *procedural* language, and I'll be happy. Of those
> I've tried, Perl is the closest I've found to what my dream language
> would be. But it's not quite it either.
It seems to me you're looking for Python?
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Best Free Unix? (why FreeBSD?)
Date: 2 Mar 1999 20:44:54 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Robert S. Sciuk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I don't know about Australian currency .. but for Canadian, you just
> lighten it by 50 cents $US, and there you have it -- 1 Canadian dollar
> 1.0 $CDN ( kind of like a VAX mip or VUP as they used to call it ;-)
And the best thing is that when you're a french-speaking Canadian
you call it "piastre" :-)
--
Stefaan
--
PGP key available from PGP key servers (http://www.pgp.net/pgpnet/)
___________________________________________________________________
Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add,
but when there is no longer anything to take away. -- Saint-Exup�ry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microkernels are an abstraction inversion
Date: 2 Mar 1999 21:00:58 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Francois-Rene Rideau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On the other hand, the Unix API is very unhelpful by its low-level nature.
> Secure locking and transaction are just a MESS,
> not to talk about reliable distributed programming:
> for the Unix API cannot guarantee any of the high-level invariants
> that are needed, and does not have a distributed resource model.
> All in all, UN*X is NOT evil, it's just an obsolete primitive design.
> Something evil would be tying us to UN*X for the eternity,
> instead of moving on to better designs.
The UNIX API is about the best when using the process/flat file
paradigm. Current OO languages are kludgy hybrids because they're
layered on top of this ancient paradigm - we need an OS that
hosts objects and orchestrates object interaction across
networks, not ORBs on top of UNIX and its little brother NT :-)
I fear that PC's having become commodities has made such a major
shift impossible (as such an OS will definitely *not* run
Word).
--
Stefaan
--
PGP key available from PGP key servers (http://www.pgp.net/pgpnet/)
___________________________________________________________________
Perfection is reached, not when there is no longer anything to add,
but when there is no longer anything to take away. -- Saint-Exup�ry
------------------------------
From: "Ron van Middendorp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wanted: linux theme screen background with a rocket by night
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 10:43:02 +0100
Reply-To: "Ron van Middendorp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Take a look overhere:
http://wm.themes.org/
Ron
Christian Tsotras <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>Hello.
>
>I saw a screen background on a linux desktop that was a photography of
>the lauching of a rocket by night near the sea, but I can't find it on
>the net.
>
>Could anybody help me to find it ?
>
>Thanks.
>
>
>--
>Christian Tsotras -- Membre de PARINUX -- 0x3CCFC2C2
>Paris Linux User Group : http://www.parinux.org/
>FAQ Ol�ane DIAL : http://worldserver.oleane.com/chris/
------------------------------
From: Sean Prest <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Matrox Mystique G200 AGP under XFree86
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 16:08:32 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm using a Daytek DT-1731D Monitor and a Mystique G200 AGP video card and now am
running 3.3.3 of X and it still refuses to work. I've attempted to mess around
with the XF86Config file but to no avail. If anyone could send me or post a
config setup that works with either my monitor type or video card it would be
greatly appreciated.
-Sean
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Fung Wai Keung)
Subject: Re: ICQ in Linux
Date: 3 Mar 1999 03:04:15 GMT
Hi ,
Joel Andrews ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I am running RedHat 5.2, with kernel 2.0.36, and am trying to get an ICQ
: program going for it.. has anyone succesfully gotten ICQ to work in
: Linux? If so, what version of ICQ (or copy) was it? And how did you go
: about installing it? I have tried the glib, and the gtk versions, but
: can't seem to get those libraries to compile properly, they always have
: errors at the end of the compile.. help!
: Joel
Licq is great. Visit its homepage at http://licq.wibble.net
--
Regards,
Wai Keung, Fung
Department of Mechanical and Automation Engineering,
The Chinese University of Hong Kong,
Shatin, N.T.,
Hong Kong.
Tel: (852)26098470 Fax: (852)26036002
------------------------------
From: Mark Mokryn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Public license question
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 10:03:00 GMT
In article <4x2D2.3640$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It's a good thing that you don't claim to know law, because it's pretty
> clear that you don't know copyright law very well.
Okay, guys... as the originator of this thread, I must protest - this
discussion is not what I intended. I assume that at least the vast majority
of us, if not all of us, are engineers, and not (thank god) lawyers. So let's
cut the legalese bullshit, since that's exactly what it is. Please, let's
talk in more concrete terms we can all understand.
My original question pertained to the intent of the GPL. Can one indeed make
money on a project based on the Linux platform? And I do not mean to make
money the Red Hat way, i.e. open up the source code and sell support. For
argument's sake, let's say I intend to build a proprietary box (e.g.
super-duper new video server) running on some OS, possibly Linux. Of course,
an open-source OS can really help, and I can promise to release any
modifications to the existing OS platform. I would most certainly not want to
release the codebase to my project, however. I understand some of you may
say, "wow, evil dude, does not give back to the community." Well, I would
contend that I am actually helping the community by basing a serious project
on Linux, and putting people's good work to use. Think of me as the good
little guy, who does not want Micros**t, for example, to come around
demanding my source code, so they can learn from it, and build a similar
project on NT, thus driving me out of business. The prospect of this may
cause one to seek another platform (even Windows!), which would not require
everything to be released.
Worrisome to me is the following, clipped from Section 2 of the GPL: ...yada
yada yada... These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If
identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and can
be reasonably considered independent and separate works in themselves, then
this License, and its terms, do not apply to those sections when you
distribute them as separate works. BUT WHEN YOU DISTRIBUTE THE SAME SECTIONS
AS PART OF A WHOLE WHICH IS A WORK BASED ON THE PROGRAM, THE DISTRIBUTION OF
THE WHOLE MUST BE ON THE TERMS OF THIS LICENSE, WHOSE PERMISSIONS FOR OTHER
LICENSEES EXTEND TO THE ENTIRE WHOLE, AND THUS TO EACH AND EVERY PART
REGARDLESS OF WHO WROTE IT. Thus, it is not the intent of this section to
claim rights or contest your rights to work written entirely by you; rather,
the intent is to exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative
or collective works based on the Program. ...
In other words, if I sell my super-duper video server box, I may be forced to
release the code to the modules I wrote entirely by myself? Is this the
intent of the GPL, to force the little guy to seek another platform? Look at
it this way: I don't have the resources to chase after Oracle in the courts
to get their Oracle for Linux code. But of course they can easily do this to
me... The problem with the GPL is: how the hell do you define "work based on
the Program"? If I use the "Program's" macros, etc., is this a work based on
the program? Why doesn't the FSF provide simple, CLEAR, for god's sake,
guidelines, so I may know what I am getting into? The ambiguity hurts us, and
not the big guys.
-Mark
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Walter Strong)
Subject: Re: Create a DOS bootdisk in using only Linux
Date: 2 Mar 1999 23:22:33 GMT
Adrian Hawkins ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Is it possible to create a MSDOS bootdisk using Linux only? Is there a
: boot image out there to do this? Or are you better off finding a
: DOS-box and creating one there?
Isn't a Dos bootdisk just dos formatted disk with the system files copied
onto it? If so, you could make your own. I forget what files get copied
onto a Dos bootdisk, command.com, some utilities, whatever else. Just
mcopy the appropriate files from a dos partition to a dos disk and you
should have a bootdisk.
------------------------------
From: Stef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: xcopilot: Bus error
Date: 3 Mar 1999 10:57:32 +0100
I got the pilot.rom File from my Palm III using getrom2. When I start
the xcopilot using the rom file I get:
Bus error: read a long from undefined memory address 0x10d00008
Illegal instruction: 7373
FATAL: weird setpc(feef1ef0) at 10c11374!
Any idea what could be wrong?
Stef
--
WebMaster D-WERK
President SOS-ETH
ETH Zurich
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hoes.li
------------------------------
From: mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: how to find what library is needed to get this symbol?
Date: 3 Mar 1999 01:04:24 -0800
In article <7bisc2$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, mike says...
>
>hello,
>
>this control-panel used to work OK. I was played with rpm, I must have
>uninstalled something, now I get this error:
>
>[lib]# control-panel
>control-panel: error in loading shared libraries
>: undefined symbol: gtk_object_check_cast
I found it. it was missing gtk-1.0.6-20.rpm
I must have removed this when I was doing something else, had no idea
what now.
But all ok now. RPM is really great. it helps one find what files go
with which RPM. I had a second PC, that also runs Linux, so I was able to
find this info from there.
Mike
------------------------------
From: Neil Zanella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: AOL Instant Messanger
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 19:31:23 -0330
Hello,
Has anyone managed to install AOL Instant Messanger for Linux?
The script aim_linux.sh I downloaded somehow fails to install an executable
on my Red Hat 5.2 system. Isn't that script supposed to install an executable
file called /usr/local/aim/aim ?
I even downloaded JDK 1.1.7 from the ftp site contrib.redhat.com but still
obtained the same results. Am I missing something?
I remember installing it on a Red Hat 5.0 machine. What is so different about
Red Hat 5.2 ? All the script creates on my 5.2 box is a directory called
aim/jre1.1.3 with some stuff but no executables in it.
Thanks.
------------------------------
From: Harry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 18:21:10 -0500
> We didn't even have 1's. We had to use the letter I <
We didn't even have Is - we made people stand next to each other.
A gap of more than an arm's length was an 0. One person farting
at the back could wipe out an entire 1K block.
Harry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shane Steven Sturrock)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Backup software
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 17:18:28 +0000
I just gpt a new drive for my Alpha after my long serving SCSI-II
died. I have partitioned it up and only one partition has anything
that I can't replace, the rest is just stuff from installs etc which
can be easily recovered. I have a JAZ 1GB drive which I have been
using to transfer files and such around so I decided to use a spare
disc as my backup so I could try out BRU2000 which came with my
RH install discs. It works well with the drive, I needed to edit
one of the tcl scripts for xbru to stop it trying to rewind the
drive but otherwise it works well and I can pull any files or
directories I need out of the archive. Using a 1GB disc is much
faster than using a tape format and I can do weekly backups of just
the stuff that has changed so that 1GB disc will keep me going for
quite some time. I like the security of it verifying backups and
so forth, I used to use tar all the time and will continue to do
so in addition to BRU.
--
Dr. Shane Sturrock - http://nova.bru.ed.ac.uk/~sss
Linux, a better WinNT than WinNT
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Shane Steven Sturrock)
Subject: Re: Linux SLOWER than win95?
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 17:28:22 +0000
On Tue, 2 Mar 1999 16:31:15, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I installed the latest Linux Mandrake (=Redhat+KDE) on a P60 with 16meg ram.
>I use a swap partition of 70 Mb.
>
>But it is much slower than my windows 95.
>Is this normal?
>Is there a way to speed it up?
>(like recompiling the kernel)
You don't really have enough memory to be running KDE, I find I need
at least 32MB to make it remotely responsive, twice that is better
still. Choose a lighter window environment like fvwm, AfterStep
or similar if you don't want to get more memory.
Linux can run in very small amounts of memory (I installed it on
a 386 with only 4MB using Slackware recently) but X does need a bit
more memory than Windows to run nicely. Give it enough memory
and it will perform well even on a P60. I am running a P75 laptop
with 40MB and KDE-1.1 and it is more responsive than Win95 on the
same machine.
--
Dr. Shane Sturrock - http://nova.bru.ed.ac.uk/~sss
Linux, a better WinNT than WinNT
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Subject: Re: KDE and KOffice
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 18:34:33 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:18:41 -0500...
..and rhino <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm using KDE1.1-0.1 and am interested in installing KOffice, which is supposed
> to need a development version of the KDE libs plus a host of other stuff which
> I am supposed to be able to download from the KDE ftp site.
Be sure what you are doing - this software is heavily alpha.
> Does anyone know what mico2.2.3 is exactly? I can't find this file anywhere in
> the KDE ftp site, nor their mirrors...
Its a CORBA Object Request Broker.
mawa
--
Everybody lies about sex. IT'S IN THE MANUAL.
-- unintentional juxtaposition in George Lin's follow-up of Adam
Hill's posting. RTFM before fibbing, I guess.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
