Linux-Misc Digest #908, Volume #19 Tue, 20 Apr 99 06:13:12 EDT
Contents:
Re: VMware sell-out to Microsoft??? ("Bill Frisbee")
Re: Things I don't get... (Kevin Martin)
Re: New RedHat 5.2 install (Marc Hoppins)
Re: Does newest version of Linux Support AGP? (brian moore)
Gnome Dependencies Problem (David Tansley)
Re: VMware sell-out to Microsoft??? (Frank Sweetser)
Changing virtual window manager in RH5.2 ("Russell S. DiPesa")
Netscape 4.5 and WordPerfect 8 in True Colour (24bpp) (D. D. Brierton)
Re: Redhat 5.2 and KDE 1.1 (David Raphael)
Re: The Best Linux distribution? (was Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux) (Leahy)
Re: Help choosing distribution (Navindra Umanee)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Bill Frisbee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: VMware sell-out to Microsoft???
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 11:39:48 -0400
Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7fajas$jjb$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Then don't use it. You obviously have lots of time to do stuff other
> than work. Some of us do need to get work done, and we will use
> systems that do the job for us (whether NT, which doesn't support any
> more hardware than does Linux, or Linux, or another free *nix, or a
> commercial Unix).
I do make a living running NT 10 hours a day. And my NT box supports my
Voodoo3, my SB Live, all my RAID adapters, all my video capture stuff and
all my DVD and CD burning stuff, care to tell me that if linux supports so
much hardware why NONE of the stuff I use daily is supported by linux except
my CPU and motherboard?
> No, about two thirds are from my admittedly anecdotal and possibly
> non-representative experience. Almost all the rest use some form of
> Unix. Many use other unrelated OSs such as Amiga or MacOS also.
> Almost all have some exposure to Windows, but hate it.
And those that hate it end up someplace in the nether regions. I learned to
USE Windows, and now am making a career because I can use it the right way
instead of bitching about it. Do things go wrong? Sure do. Just like things
go wrong in linux... and I got something else to say on that to, my company
not only does software for NT, but also Linux, Solaris, AIX, DG/ux, and
HP/ux. Guess which one is the easiest to program? Which one sells the best?
> I was referring specifically to workstation/desktop applications.
> Everyone who uses the net uses Linux as a server, at least indirectly.
> What do you think processes the bulk of mail and news traffic?
Then you loos more of your numbers as there are very few people who use
Linux as a workstation/deskop...
> That statement speaks volumes about your knowledge of platforms other
> than Windows. I don't think you're qualified to participate in this
> discussion.
Hmmm... been in this industry programming for the MacOS, Linux, AIX, Solaris
and a few other OS's since 1992.
> If I wanted 20 year old technology I'd just use a DOS extender such as
> Windows 98. :)
>
> Linux is state of the art in most respects (not all, but most).
And yet Linux still does not support my hardware... go figure NT does... as
does Windows98...
> : Blagh... sure man... and I bet you support OSS too...
>
> Yes, I support free software. That is nothing to be ashamed of. I do
> prefer open-source to closed-software as well, even if it is not free.
>
> You can certainly use proprietary, bloated and unstable/unreliable
> garbage if you like, but I prefer not to.
And I prefer to get PAID for the work I do instead of getting paid for only
for supporting it. How many people do you know are going to pay for support
for a product they did not even pay for? Not many I am willing to bet.
Meanwhile the NT server in the other room has been up since May with only 4
reboots (SP's and hotfixes) so how is that unstable and unreliable? It
supports all the hardware that I have in it, and it works damn fine. The
same install of Linux with all the features I am currently running on NT on
the SAME machine would take up the SAME amount of HDD space (370 or so MB).
Bill F.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kevin Martin)
Subject: Re: Things I don't get...
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 15:41:47 GMT
In article <7fffc5$n2t$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, it says Greg F Walz Chojnacki
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I'm looking for information on the following three topics:
Just my $0.02 -- it would make a lot more sense (by which I mean it would be
more useful to you and to others) to have made this two posts -- one RPM-
related and one not.
>1) Dependencies
> I've been having trouble RPMing some packages; I'm getting dependency
> errors. Is there some source that describes this problem in general
> terms? I know I have to load new libraries, but I'm not sure where
> to get them, where the old ones reside on my installtion...
My experience (yours may differ) -- once you start playing around with
anything that is not RedHat provided, forget about RPM ever working again. I
download .tgz files rather than RPM's whenever I have a choice.
>2) Xwindows
> I have it running, but don't really understand the relationship
> between XFree86, fvwm (e.g.), gnome, enlightenment, the architecture,
> generally. And I sure as hell don't know how to configure the menus,
> e.g. how to tell it how to put a menu item for loading Netscape.
> (Currently, I load it from a terminal commmand line.)
That's an excellent way to do it, I recommend it highly. (No smiley -- I'd
rather type "netscape &" than fight with the godawful configuration
languages that ANY of those window manages use.)
X -- the thing that paints the screen -- is the underpinning for all the
other things you mention above. The "other things" are window managers, and
what they "manage" is literally the frames around each of the windows on
screen, plus the "root menu" you get when you click on the bare desktop.
It's very educational to leave an xterm running while you change window
managers, and see the frame around it change! That really made it clear to
me what was X and what was window manager.
Writing an X app is also a quick education in what's what, but of course
that's not for everyone. I ported an Atari Basic program to C and X and ran
it on a VAX, as plain X11 and as a Motif app, some years ago. No practical
use but it did make it clear how the parts go together.
>3) How to install apps without RPM.
Really should group this with the first paragraph and make a new thread out
of it.... Okay, okay, I'll stop repeating myself.
> I think I have the general idea, but I don't think I know the best
> places to install, and particularly how to install apps so that
> multiple users can run them.
/usr/local is the convention for add on apps, though lately I've seen more
natter about a directory called "/opt". So:
cd /tmp/download
gunzip tarball.tgz
cd /usr/local
tar xvf /tmp/download/tarball.tar
If whoever put the tarball together did it right, it should create its own
directory under the directory where you're unpacking it, so you'll have a
nice new /usr/local/linuxapp_i386_v_1.0 directory ready to rock and roll.
The protections should have been set properly by whoever packaged the thing.
If not, what's so tough about doing "chmod 755 *" as root? (Just
double-check my octal arithmetic -- you don't want to make the wrong things
writable. :-) r = 4, w = 2, x = 1; so 5 = r_x and 7 = rwx. Position is
owner, group, world. So 755 means "owner (i.e. root) = read, write,
execute; group = read, execute; world = group, execute".
RedHat has a whole self-justifying explanation of their "standard" approach
to what goes where; poke around a bit and it ought to turn up. (Gotta love
standards, there are so many of them....)
>I suppose this is probably a book's worth of questions. Can anyone recommend
>a title?
"Running Linux" by Matt Welsh et.al. Read it slowly, one time while away
from your computer and then again sitting at your computer. Get the thick
version, NOT the "CD companion" version that has an obsolete copy of RedHat
bound into the back.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc Hoppins)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: New RedHat 5.2 install
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:44:06 GMT
Around Wed, 14 Apr 1999 04:51:21 +0000, the entitiy known as
[EMAIL PROTECTED] plagiarised:
>Marc Hoppins wrote:
>
>> This is my new config. A purpose built system.
>>
>> Gigabyte m/board
>> 128Mb SDRAM (100MHz)
>> Intel PII 350
>> Maxtor 8Gb drive
>> Internal ATAPI ZIP
>> 32x CDROM
>> SB PCI 128
>> ATI Rage 128/16Mb
>>
>> I attempted to install redhat using the CD. I restart the system and
>> it boots from the CD...gets past the IDE probe then hangs...Cannot
>> figure this one out...any suggestions?
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>>
>> Marc
>
>Did you try booting from the floppy?
>
Yes...same problem. The drives are identified but just after that the
thing hangs...I am going to try Slackware...never had any problems
with that before.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Subject: Re: Does newest version of Linux Support AGP?
Date: 19 Apr 1999 15:23:48 GMT
On Mon, 19 Apr 1999 17:11:42 +1000,
Hallman, Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have been trying to install an old version of linux onto my PC but it
> isnt't detecting my onboard AGP
> video card or my onboard sound card, does anyone know if i got the
> latest Red Hat Linux would it fix my problem or am i just wasting my
> time?
Depends on the vidoe card.
The latest XFree works great with my Matrox AGP card.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David Tansley)
Subject: Gnome Dependencies Problem
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 08:49:48 GMT
Hi, just got Linux 5.1 working, after much hardship...beginning to see
that there is some truth in the saying "Linux: it's a bit odd, and
terribly complicated"
So now I'm trying to jolly up my X install with Gnome. I've dl'd every
damn thing that the website recommends, and installed it all, and managed
to get the list of failed dependencies down to just two items...
libgnome.so.0 is required by ....
libgnomeui.so.0 is required by .... [can't remember the packages, sorry]
and I have now idea where these libs come from. Can anyone help.
I'm a beginner...be gentle with me :)
--
Dave
------------------------------
From: Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: VMware sell-out to Microsoft???
Date: 19 Apr 1999 11:44:57 -0400
"Bill Frisbee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You slashdot longhairs better realize that Linux is not some saviour of
> computer technology, and it sure the hell is not going to "kill" Microsoft
> and it sure the HELL is not the answer to the need for the decent OS.
linux is simply the most visibly successful product of the free software
movement, founded by richard stallman, who had the radical idea that maybe
morals and ethics ought to have a place in the software industry.
http://www.gnu.org/ for more info on it.
--
Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu fsweetser at blee.net | PGP key available
paramount.ind.wpi.edu RedHat 5.2 kernel 2.2.5 i586 | at public servers
Perl will always provide the null.
-- Larry Wall in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: "Russell S. DiPesa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Changing virtual window manager in RH5.2
Date: 19 Apr 1999 15:54:47 GMT
To all,
How do you change the virtual window manager by hand? I was using the
window manager that is similar to Windows 95. This one had a menu that
allowed you to switch to several diferent window managers. I switched to
one that doesn't have that menu, and now I would like to switch back. How
do I do it?
Russ
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (D. D. Brierton)
Subject: Netscape 4.5 and WordPerfect 8 in True Colour (24bpp)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 15:31:29 GMT
Netscape 4.5 and WordPerfect 8 work fine in 256 colours (8bpp), but if
I start X in anything higher then they appear completely scambled
(toolbars, splashscreens, images in NS, all unreadable---just black
and white splodges). Is there something silly I am doing, i.e. not
starting them with the correct command line options? Is there a way of
invoking them that works regardless of which colour depth you are
working in. I am using WindowMaker as my window manager, with Red Hat
5.2 (with Red Hat updates).
Thanks in advance for any help ...
Darren
------------------------------
From: David Raphael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux.redhat,comp.os.linux.setup,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Redhat 5.2 and KDE 1.1
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 09:23:41 GMT
RJA wrote:
>
> I am trying to install KDE 1.1 on RedHat 5.2 (updated kernel 2.2.4). However
> I cannot install as it tells me I do not have Mandrake installed. How do I
> get around this?
Mandrake is another distribution of Linunx. Download the tarballs for
Redhat 5.2. This should make you life a little easier.
David Raphael
------------------------------
From: Leahy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: The Best Linux distribution? (was Re: FreeBSD vs. Linux)
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 1999 22:29:58 -0700
Don Martin wrote:
> Well as an experienced Slackware user perhaps you could advise me.
> Whenever I tried to configure XF86 I got a final window with Netscape
> Buttons, etc at the bottom of the screen. The best part of it alll is
> both my mouse and keyboard would freeze and I was unable to resolve
> this problem. I do not have similar situation with Red Hat. Also with
> Slackware I noticed it uses ttyS0 for modems and tty00 for mouse ...
> could these variations have caused my mouse and keyboard to freeze?
> I am using a microsoft compatible two-button mouse and Microsoft
> Natural Keyboard. I would love to run Slackware if I can unfreeze my
> mouse and keyboard. Would appreciate your advise on how to resolve
> these problems. problem. Like you I too like Slackware but was put off
> by the frozen mouse and keyboard.
>
> On Mon, 19 Apr 1999 02:21:33 -0400, Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> >Leahy wrote:
> >
> >> Regards to Donn, I'm not familiar with Debian or Slackware so I cant really
> >> compare. I use RedHat 5.2
> >> (as well as FreeBSD 3.1) I'm not sure why he is recommending against RedHat. I
>find
> >> it to be stable and easy to set up. The accompanying software is extensive and
> >> RPM's are readily available and easy to install. Compiling and installing from
> >> source is also relatively simple. As I say though, I have not tried the other
> >> Linuxes.
> >> Donn, can you tell me why you recommend against RedHat? I'm not being smart, I'm
> >> genuinely curious.
> >
> >Well, I've tried both Slackware and Debian. My first encounter with
> >Linux was with the Slackware distribution, back in May-June 1995. I
> >ran that until about Oct 1996 (the same distribution with no kernel
> >upgrades). Then, I switched to FreeBSD in Nov. 1996, and I'm still
> >running it now.
> >
> >I tried the free Solaris promo. (Summer 1998) on my second HD, which
> >is what I used previously to download packages and such. After
> >finding out that Solaris wouldn't work with my CDROM, I basically said
> >the heck with it, and decided I can put Linux as my "third" OS, on my
> >spare HD. Well, I started out with Debian. I found the package
> >management system frustrating. From reading a lot of posts on Debian
> >(on DejaNews, and on my news server), I found that a lot of people
> >liked it's package management system, and denounced Red Hat as being
> >too "graphical" with its administration tools. People were also
> >saying that Red Hat installations tend to put config files in
> >"strange" directories. Actually, this is just from hearsay from
> >reading DejaNews posts, so I'm basing my recommendations on that.
> >
> >I scrapped my Debian system, as it was causing me some headaches.
> >Seeing as to how I started out on Slackware, I replaced my Debian with
> >Slack. I like Slack because, well, it was my first exposure to
> >Linux. So familiarity was the key decision here; I figured why try
> >to force myself to like Debian, when I feel most comfortable with
> >Slack?
> >
> >Actually, you'll find people getting kind of personal over what Linux
> >distro. to use. Like, "Slackware is the most BSD-like, but it's not
> >as secure as Debian, and the package management system is sloppy".
> >Or, Slackware fanatics (especially those who use FreeBSD also) will
> >like the fact that it is more BSD-like than the other distros. I like
> >Slackware the best, since I can just download the whole distribution
> >with a command like:
> >
> >get slakware.tar
> >
> >And the distribution size, minus the packages, seems smaller than the
> >other Linux distros. So for me, Slackware is best, because of 1.)
> >familiarity, 2.) I find it easiest to download 3.) I like the
> >simplicity of its set-up programs. I like Debian too, but I found it
> >hard to find out which packages I needed, and I didn't like it's
> >package management system. Slackware seemed to be very good at giving
> >you the packages you needed, without hunting around all over the
> >place. Plus, I find that Slackware does a lot of hand holding when
> >installing the system for the first time.
> >
> >There are many Linux distributions. I found out going from Slackware
> >--> Debian required a certain learning curve, and basically, I figured
> >why deal with learning a new system when I can just stick with Slack,
> >which is what I am most familiar with. People in this NG have tried
> >to talk me out of using Slackware, and into using Debian, and I
> >listened. It's no use! I'm "old school", like slackware, so it's
> >what I use. In the end, though, it matters little what distribution
> >you use; the Linux kernel is what matters the most. The differences
> >will be mainly: 1. package management, 2. configuration tools, 3.)
> >directory structure, 4.) start-up script functionality.
> >
> >So I'm going to recant my recommendation on which Linux distro. to
> >use, as there are so many of them. Some of them excel in areas that
> >others don't. For example: Slackware is the easiest to download, but
> >its package management sucks. Well, it's not too bad, but it doesn't
> >do any dependency checking the way Debian does. From what I've read,
> >Red Hat has the most GUI-oriented administration tools, and a lot of
> >people on DejaNews didn't like that.
> >
> >If you praise one Linux distro. and condemn the others, people will
> >make it a religious issue and get pissed off. So now, if someone
> >wants a recommendation on which is better, FreeBSD or Linux, I'll just
> >say (if Linux is better suited to the task) "Linux, but try to pick
> >out which distribution suits you the best." And that's the way it
> >should be; if people want to run Linux, just, as they say, "Do it!"
> >and just use whatever distribution you find most comfortable with.
> >
> >Actually, I was basing my previous recommendation of Debian, Slackware
> >over Red Hat on what I've read from DejaNews. That's wrong; people
> >should just try each one out for size, so to speak, and just so which
> >one fits the best. ;-)
Under linux, a serial mouse that is on com 1 under windows should be on either cua0
(for
2.0.3x kernel)
and ttyS0 (for 2.2.x kernel)
these commands assume that your mouse is a serial mouse on com 1
create a sim link in /dev
cd /dev
ln -s cua0 mouse (if you have 2.0.3x kernel)
or
ln -s ttyS0 mouse (if you have a 2.2.x kernel)
If you have ps2 mouse rather than a serial mouse, you need to recompile your kernel to
support the mouse.
This issue should not be related to the Linux Dist, only to the kernel version you are
running.
------------------------------
From: Navindra Umanee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Help choosing distribution
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Date: Tue, 20 Apr 1999 09:25:45 GMT
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Navindra Umanee ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> : Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : > Mr "Hate Spam", please note: Take what Bloody Viking says with a large
> : > brick of water-softener salt. He had a bad experience with a broken BIOS
> : > and ever since has been blaming it on LILO, even after knowing it was
> : > the BIOS's fault. He won't shut up about it.
>
> : I haven't followed all these LILO "flames", ohg ubj qb lbh xabj sbe
> : fher gung uvf ceboyrz vf n "oebxra" ovbf?
>
> Because he said so himself.
Ah well, in that case I'd be the cynic and tend not to believe that's
the real problem.
-N. (who's previously done tech support)
--
"These download files are in Microsoft Word 6.0 format. After unzipping,
these files can be viewed in any text editor, including all versions of
Microsoft Word, WordPad, and Microsoft Word Viewer." [Microsoft website]
< http://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~navindra/editors/ >
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
