Linux-Misc Digest #12, Volume #20 Sat, 1 May 99 20:13:11 EDT
Contents:
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522) (brian moore)
Re: Kernel 2.2.X rpm (Michael Fleming)
Re: 'screen' and dselect/lynx/mutt/slrn (terminfo?) (Steve Lamb)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (Tesla Coil)
DAT problem (Edward Vigmond)
Re: glibc2 problems... (Juergen Heinzl)
Re: WordStar (or equiv.) on LINUX? (Karel Jansens)
Re: Good ISP that supports Linux ("Cameron Spitzer")
SUID games? What is RedHat doing? (Bill Unruh)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522) (Prins Olivier)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522) (Prins Olivier)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522) (Prins Olivier)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522)
Date: 1 May 1999 22:58:19 GMT
On Sat, 01 May 1999 22:04:26 GMT,
Peter Seebach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> brian moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Sat, 01 May 1999 18:13:47 GMT,
> > Peter Seebach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Windows is still *relatively* inexpensive, as in, it's not very much of the
> >> cost of the computer.
>
> >Oh?
>
> >It's a pretty good chunk of the price of a sub-1000 dollar system.
>
> I'm not sure; from what e-machines did when they did a rebate ($26), it sounds
> like it could be relatively cheap. Keep in mind, vendors don't pay as much
> as you or I would.
>
> Assume it's $50 on a $500 system. 10% isn't "very much", in my book.
It's higher than the sales tax in most (all?) states in the US.
Something that costs less than 50c to make is higher than the margin
the manufacturer gets? I'd say that's high.
> That said, there *is* free software that runs on Windows. Just not a whole
> lot.
And most is crappy.
> However, his argument was about *cost* of software, not freedom.
But the mere existence of some shoddy zero-cost software doesn't make a
system useful.
> I'd like to point out that I by no means consider Windows a good system. I
> just disapprove of making untrue claims about it - because we don't *need*
> to. The truth is damning enough.
But claiming there is a wealth of free software for Windows is bogus:
there is a lot of zero-cost software for truly stupid things that
MS did wrong or left out (like a working telnet client), but even the
vast majority of little toys are sharware and not free in any sense of
the word.
There isn't a zero-cost word processor for Windows (unless you count
"NotePad") -- but Linux has many, including WP8 if your not in a
commercial setting, or LyX and AbiWord if you're at work. Add in
StarOffice and Applixware that are included with some distributions and
you've got a healthy choice of software that comes with the OS.
None of my statements were untrue: you may differ on whether 10% is a
significant portion of the cost, but consider it in comparison to the
manufacturer's margin on the machine and it is significant. Don't you
find it ironic that whilst Compaq, Dell, and others are complaining of
lower earnings due to the current hardware price wars, that MS is
proclaiming the PC industry is alive and well because they have record
profits?
Microsoft has a higher per-unit profit on sub-$1000 machines than the
manufacturers, and they have far less risk and capital on the line.
Pretty neat trick, eh?
--
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] (Michael Fleming)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.2.X rpm
Date: 1 May 1999 08:35:36 GMT
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
I'm glad Jim Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said this and not me..
>
> Neal Barney wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
<snip>
> > This actually, isn't too far from the truth. I just compiled the 2.2.7
> >kernel on my machine two days ago. Before I was running standard
> >RH5.2. I can't believe the speed increase. I figured it would improve,
> >but I had no idea. Oh, and be careful with a kernel RPM. Don't use rpm
> >-U {kernel rpm here} That doesn't work like you think it would. Trust
> >me. :) I was a newbie once.
> I thought it was because I compiled for Pentium II.
> Much faster. I also like no having to worry about modules.
>
> Kernel RPMS and Source RPMS do seem like a bad idea.
> The benefits are too great for .gz, .bz files.
> That is truely "open source."
> No RPM to worry about.
rpms are OK for convenience, but because the folks at RH have to try and
cover as much as possible, they tend to be sub-optimal. IMHO you'll get much
better performance from a hand-tuned kernel. This became _very_ apparent from
when I went from an rpm of 2.0.36 to an unpackaged 2.2.4 (now 2.2.7-ac1)
> BTW, if anyone is reading this how does one apply the Alan kernel patches
> and also
> how does one remove them since I hear you have to before you apply the next?
Alan Cox's patches (which are usually very handy, FWIW - AMD mtrr support and
some other drivers not in the stock kernel for instance) are applied by
putting them in /usr/src (unpacked), then
cd linux
patch -p1 < ../patch-2.2.X-acX
If you get no complaints, all's well. Not sure about backing out though - I
usually nuke the directories and start from scratch, keeping only the .config
files.
> Thanks, Jim
HIH.
Michael Fleming.
- --
Michael Fleming -=(UDIC)=- Despam the Planet
WWW: http://www.eisa.net.au/~mfleming/ | PGP: OEF8E582
Bill Gates isn't the Devil - Satan made sure Hell worked
before he opened it to the damned...
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBNyq80H66PsYO+OWCEQKQWwCffNS+Zj/FQxvKq/SkJHYvnjmc0VMAoIqU
Fev6wyiCc4LbDZzWgoW++heP
=r0tn
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Lamb)
Subject: Re: 'screen' and dselect/lynx/mutt/slrn (terminfo?)
Date: 1 May 1999 18:02:32 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 30 Apr 1999 08:20:05 GMT, Tim Sutherland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Screen is in misc. I tried out the potato version as well. The new terminfo
>screen.ti fixes the dselect/mutt problems, but the 'bce' problem still exists.
No, I was looking for the sources to dselect.
--
Steve C. Lamb | Opinions expressed by me are not my
| employer's. They hired me for my
ICQ: 5107343 | skills and labor, not my opinions!
=======================================+=====================================
------------------------------
From: Tesla Coil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 03:09:05 -0500
On 29 Apr 1999, Don Bashford wrote at length, concluding:
> The phenomenal technical success of free software has demonstrated
> that programmers can spontaneously organize themselves to take on
> projects that no one person could do. Thus, the anarchist communist
> mode is a demonstrated success for software production. Distribution
> can be just as anarchic, without any problems. This mode seems to be
> a natural fit for software writing, just as the capitalist mode was a
> natural fit for factory production.
>
> So you see, GNU anarchist communism gonna get yo mama.
Ah, a truly knows-the-score post!
If we could dispense for a moment with the question of proving or
disproving Marx's critique of political economy, I think it of interest
to supplement this with a look at software production in the context
of his interrogation of capitalist economics.
Marx's analysis states that the exchange value of a commodity is
determined by its socially necessary labor time. The worker is also
a commodity, and their exchange value is determined by the socially
necessary labor time to produce one to serve that worker's function,
e.g., their means of survival, education, etc.
(A note for the uninitiated: exchange value is not to be confused with
price. Price is determined by such factors as supply and demand, but
statements like "high demand and low supply results in a higher price"
presuppose an exchange value that occurs at an abstract equilibrium).
The worker is variable capital as distinguished from constant capital,
e.g.,tools, raw material. Variable capital produces value beyond itself,
while the value of constant capital is transferred incrementally across
the number of commodities it serves to produce.
Now, the original code *does* have exchange value. Indeed, the socially
necessary labor time required for its production is more or less intensive.
But if this code is not sold as a service, e.g., a customized database for
a single purchaser, it enters the market as duplicates of the original code.
The duplicate is identical in use value to the original, and at this stage
of production, the original code *has become constant capital*.
The socially necessary labor time for software duplication is negligible,
and capacity for output from the necessary constant capital for that
duplication is vast. The transfer of constant capital spreads toward
zero, dispersing the value of the original code. Operating systems and
compilers are among commodity code so dispersible; the constant capital
they would submit to the production of original code is reduced as well.
Concepts such as "intellectual property" may be necessary to sustain
individual profit, but sorry, they are not *socially necessary.* Verily,
"GNU anarchist communism gonna get yo mama."
However, in Marx's analysis, "free beer" commodity software would
result *without* departure from the capitalist order of things. There
is no use accusing GNU of playing unfair that this should happen. It
is just those "contradictions of capitalism" within which you happily
operate when profitable to you, and complain about when they aren't.
------------------------------
From: Edward Vigmond <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: DAT problem
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 23:12:08 GMT
Hello
I am having trouble getting a SONY SDT-7000 DAT drive to wrok properly.
I am running RH5.1 with the AHA152X SCSI module. The device seems to
work for files less than 3M but after this point, the computer hangs and
I have to power cycle. I have this problem using tar, taper and dump so
it must e at a lower level. If anyone has any ideas, I would be very
appreciative.
Thanks
--
Ed Vigmond
Institut de Genie Biomedical, Universite de Montreal
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Juergen Heinzl)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: glibc2 problems...
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 23:11:35 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Geir wrote:
>I am trying to get glibc2 installed as my C-library. I have downloaded
>the source-files and
>want to get them compiled. However, I have run into a problem when
>trying to run "configure". I get a message telling me that I need the
>linux sources for linux version 2.0.10 or newer. The message also tells
>me that the version is checked in the "version.h" file under
><linux/include>. I am, however, running linux version 2.2.3, and I have
>all the source files installed for this version. When I check the file
>"/usr/include/linux/version.h" it correctly says that the version is
>2.2.3. Still I get the error-message from "configure".
Make sure /usr/include/linux is a symbolic link, not a directory *and*
points to the rigth directory.
>I used to run version 2.0.0 and I still have got these source-files
>installed, but /usr/src/linux is linked to the new sources, so this
>should not be a problem, or...?
... see above ...
Cheers,
Juergen
--
\ Real name : J�rgen Heinzl \ no flames /
\ EMail Private : [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ send money instead /
------------------------------
From: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net (Karel Jansens)
Reply-To: jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
Subject: Re: WordStar (or equiv.) on LINUX?
Date: 29 Apr 1999 13:49:02 GMT
Have a look at Cliq, a complete office suite for character terminals. It's
not WordStar, but it comes pretty close. It's also not free, but you can
try it out for 30 days.
IIRC it's at www.quad.com.
On Thu, 29 Apr 1999 13:16:48, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Help, please.
>
> I know someone who would like to switch to LINUX. Because he can type 100 WPM
> and knows WordStar for DOS better than his phone number, he would like to know
> if a version of WordStar, with control diamond (Ctrl+S, Ctrl+E, Ctrl+X, and
> Ctrl+D) functionality, exists for LINUX. Or, an equivalent. I looked into
> StarOffice, it looks like it came out of StarWriter.
>
> Does anyone know what became of WordStar? Has anyone heard of someone buying
> WordStars assets or code or the rights thereto?
>
> Or, can he just run WordStar in a DOS window? He needs this as an
> honest-to-God word processor, not a text editor.
>
> I would appreciate any help you can provide.
>
> THANKS!
>
Karel Jansens
jansens_at_ibm_dot_net
===============================================================
Having a kid at sixty, that's an accident.
Having a piano fallen on your head, that's just bad luck.
Agent WD40, Dick Steel
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: "Cameron Spitzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Good ISP that supports Linux
Date: 1 May 1999 19:23:36 GMT
In article <7gedh7$4ees$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Can anyone suggest a good ISP that supports Linux?
Once you "know what you're doing" (what an annoying phrase), almost any
ISP "supports Linux." They provide a standard PPP dialtone, and they don't
care what's running on your end of the wire.
But if you're going to need local tech support, "support Linux" actually
means something. An all-NT turnkey shop will not know what to tell you
when you ask for the nameserver's IP number, because Microsoft Dial-up
Networking (an "extended" PPP) negotiates that automatically.
They will not be able to tell you what's wrong with your chat script.
A "supports Linux" ISP will have someone who can answer things like that.
Avoid ISPs whose "home" (index) pages are festooned with "powered by
Microsoft Back Office" and "Best viewed with Internet Explorer" buttons.
A prominently displayed "No Spamming" policy statement is always a good
sign of an ISP that knows what they're doing.
>I am in the LA area and
>would like unlimited access with no set up fee, a good news feed and a UNIX
>shell account.
My customers with LA Freenet accounts are happy there. I have had good
experiences with LA Bridge.
Cameron
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Unruh)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.security.unix
Subject: SUID games? What is RedHat doing?
Date: 1 May 1999 19:20:59 GMT
On a new install of Redhat 5,2 (also there in 5.1) I get the following
24533 15 -rws--x--x 1 root root 14908 May 9 1998
/usr/games/vga_klondike
24534 16 -rws--x--x 1 root root 15484 May 9 1998
/usr/games/vga_ohhell
24535 13 -rws--x--x 1 root root 12876 May 9 1998
/usr/games/vga_solitaire
24536 16 -rws--x--x 1 root root 16316 May 9 1998
/usr/games/vga_spider
24537 18 -rws--x--x 1 root root 18108 May 7 1998
/usr/games/vga_connectN
24538 16 -rws--x--x 1 root root 15664 May 7 1998
/usr/games/vga_mines
24539 18 -rws--x--x 1 root root 18244 May 7 1998
/usr/games/vga_othello
What the hell is RedHat doing shipping games which are suid root? This
makes no sense at all!
------------------------------
From: Prins Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522)
Date: Sat, 01 May 1999 10:26:45 +0200
Craig Dowell wrote:
> Prins Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >>Craig Dowell wrote:
> >
> >>In that context, your "cutting corners" is not always a bad thing. You
> >>may call it cutting a corner, someone else may call it a tradeoff or
> >>product definition or design decision. Unix and Linux certainly weren't
> >>built without any of this. Some people just like the result of the
> >>tradeoffs and design decisions made for Unix better than those made for
> >>Windows; and, of course, vice versa.
> >
> >What do you get for your tradeoff when using Windows???...
>
> For the vast majority of just-plain-folks out there in consumer-land,
> Windows works just fine. System bundles are cheap and convenient. Windows
> software is everywhere. Devices to do almost anything you could ever want
> to do are available. The cousins can come over t' the house and show you
> how to run the dang thing. Junior can run his encyclopedia programs and
> do his homework on it. Uncle Ralph can download porno with it. Mom can
> print flyers for the local housewives' club. Dad can send faxes for the
> NRA. Sissy can fill her address book and schedules with imaginary dates
> with imaginary suitors. They turn it on when they want to use it and then
> turn it off. It works fine for them. Kindof like that Ford Escort I
> mentioned in my original post. It's a convenient, relatively inexpensive
> and effective solution for them.
>
But you can do all those things With Linux too. ok ok, the packages are usually
not easy to install for ordinary ppl, but they are cheaper than software for
windows...And with RedHat etc....the installation of Linux and a whole bunch of
applications has become possible for everybody ( and there are also cousins who
can explain linux you know, i am one)...and i still don't understand you saying
windows is relatively inexpensive. Linux u can get for free, well you've got to
pay the phone-bill but hey then just get cable. And if u use Linux you dont have
to buy a p III to get performance.
--
Running Windows on a PIII, is like driving a $200,000 Porsche only backwards.....
------------------------------
From: Prins Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522)
Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 02:03:58 +0200
Peter Seebach wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Prins Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Peter Seebach wrote:
> >> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> >> Prins Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >Yes you do get more video games, but that isn't a fair trade-off, if
> >Linux would
> >> >be in the position Windows is in they would all be Linux games. And any video
> >> >game you play with Linux runs better, than it does under Windows, for
> >which they
> >> >are made....
>
> >> That's like saying "it's not fair to blame new poorly-understood structural
> >> materials for failures we have with them". It is fair to blame the
> >> "poorly-understood" part.
>
> >I dont understand your point here, do you mean that is said that it's
> >not fair to
> >blame Windows for it's failures???
>
> No. I mean it's not fair to say "this isn't a weakness because it's only
> a weakness in the world we live in".
>
> Linux doesn't have as much software support as Windows at the moment; it's
> harder to go into a store and get a pre-built, easy-to-install, package to
> do an arbitrary task. There are small exceptions, but Windows has better
> software support.
>
> It's not fair to pretend that this advantage doesn't exist, just because it
> only exists because Windows is currently dominant. It may be a temporary
> thing, but it's a real advantage.
>
> The lack of support for Linux is probably temporary; Activision announced
> that one of their games will ship for it. I'm guessing that Linux will be
> a significant chunk of the gaming market within another five years or so,
> because, well, it costs users very little to get Linux, and if games come
> out for it that they want, they'll get it.
>
> But, *RIGHT NOW*, it is an advantage Windows has over Linux.
>
> Let's ignore games. I want to upgrade the firmware on my ISDN router. I can
> download a firmware image, but for some reason, tftp isn't working very well
> today. They suggested I get their special Windows management package.
> Doesn't exist for anything but Windows. Ascend has a firewall feature in some
> of their boxes, which you can't control from anything but Windows.
>
> Are these advantages "intrinsic" to Windows? No. There is nothing in the
> nature of Windows that makes it a good platform for this, and there are a
> lot of flaws in it. However, there is something in the *situation* of Windows
> that makes it a good platform to develop for - it is very, very, widespread.
>
> That's one of the trade-offs, and it currently goes in the favor of Windows.
>
> That said, when I wanted to get my mom set up with a laptop, I decided that
> I considered "reliable" more important than "lots of software", so I set it
> up with NetBSD.
>
> -s
> --
> Copyright 1999, All rights reserved. Peter Seebach / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
> Will work for interesting hardware. http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/
> Visit my new ISP <URL:http://www.plethora.net/> --- More Net, Less Spam!
Your argument on the ftp and the world we live in etc...is very correct i am wrong
there ( hey , it's the story of my life),...but the support you say ms and other
companies give on their software packages it is not real support....is saying: "just
install the program again", or : "wait for the upgrade" real support?? I dont think
so.
now you can get real support on linux problems, albeit no "official" support, the
problem is of course finding the right place to get it, often not easy for normal
end-users, but it is there ( on IRC or news-net)...
--
Running Windows on a PIII, is like driving a $200,000 Porsche only backwards.....
------------------------------
From: Prins Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522)
Date: Sun, 02 May 1999 02:06:03 +0200
Peter Seebach wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Prins Olivier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Peter Seebach wrote:
> >> You don't for Windows, either. Now, you'll never get *as much* performance,
> >> but often, that's okay.
>
> >You think that's okay??
>
> Yes.
>
> >linux running on the same machine, or compare playing quake 1 on a p166
> >under linux
> >or under windows, on the first it's playable in a nice resolution on the
> >later it's
> >not....
>
> True enough, unless you have a good graphics card - which probably ran GLQuake
> on Windows a year or two before it ran it on Linux. :)
>
> That said, a friend of mine is running *NT*, for crying out loud, on a P166.
> It works fine.
>
> I have a Celery running Windows. It's not as powerful or as fast as any of
> my other boxes - but in practice, the only time I experience delays, it's
> because disks can only read a few megs a second still. Or because I have a
> slow net feed.
>
> >And do you also think it's fair that Microsoft tries to take all
> >the credit
> >for their supposed increase in performance that's actually caused by better
> >hardware???
>
> No. And I make a point of telling people, whenever I get the chance, that
> Unix probably gets twice the performance (or more) out of a given piece of
> hardware that Windows does.
>
> But that doesn't mean the performance Windows get on a given box can't be
> good enough for a given user.
>
> >Running Windows on a PIII, is like driving a $200,000 Porsche only
> >backwards.....
>
> Nah. It's like getting a GPS system for your diesel Rabbit, and getting a
> GPS that broadcasts your location to everyone. :)
>
> -s
> --
> Copyright 1999, All rights reserved. Peter Seebach / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
> Will work for interesting hardware. http://www.plethora.net/~seebs/
> Visit my new ISP <URL:http://www.plethora.net/> --- More Net, Less Spam!
ok i think we'll call it a draw here :)? ok with you?
--
Running Windows on a PIII, is like driving a $200,000 Porsche only backwards.....
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
