Linux-Misc Digest #183, Volume #20 Thu, 13 May 99 08:13:09 EDT
Contents:
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522) (Peter Seebach)
Re: I am on a quest... (Steve Lamb)
Re: GNU reeks of Communism (returning to %252522GNU Communism%252522) (Michael Powe)
Re: Ken Thompson on Linux (Rob Fisher)
fdisk /MBR ??? ("Mikael Wetterstrand")
information on "how to make a bootable linux cdrom"... or? (TedC)
Re: Need Presentation Graphics Software ("Ferdinand V. Mendoza")
Re: Telnet to WINE/Linux App Server Running Office97 ("Ferdinand V. Mendoza")
Re: Linux finally (fred smith)
Re: Did someone say sudo? (was 'Is Unix a single user operating (Rob Fisher)
Re: Proper use of /usr/local (Re: The Best Linux distribution?) (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Telnet to WINE/Linux App Server Running Office97 (Martijn Kruithof)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Seebach)
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 17:09:34 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Marco Anglesio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>And so have I. And we both benefit from the existence of a social welfare
>system that makes sure that we do not starve without an employer/master.
I'm not sure I agree. I think that, as a whole, we're worse off.
The fact is, I know very few people who have been substantially helped by
that system, and I know a lot who would be a lot more free to leave their
current employment if they hadn't had a substantial chunk of their paychecks
taken away from them for "reemployment insurance" for their entire working
lives.
It sounds nice; in practice, I suspect that far too much of the money goes
into paperwork, and far too little actually does any good.
(For that matter, until recently, the U.S. welfare system discouraged people
from finding employment that didn't pay substantially better than welfare.)
-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!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve Lamb)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x,alt.os.slackware.linux
Subject: Re: I am on a quest...
Date: 12 May 1999 16:46:13 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 12 May 1999 00:03:13 GMT, brian moore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Really? And, um, how does it do that when you're on vacation?
Uhm, generally the same way as when it does it when I'm not on vacation.
>Your MUA isn't running then, remember?
You're sure about that? News flash. Except for the times I'm in my car
moving back and forth from home and work my MUA runs 24/7 regardless of what I
am doing. You're making a base assumption on other people's reading habits.
>> And when you add 20 new filters for an account to 20 new mailboxes?
>>Gee, have to go and set all 20 up all over again. Tedious, boring
>>HACKED together.
>Yes, it's too bad that procmail doesn't allow you to include files. Oh,
>wait, it does.
What does that have to do with having to create the filters? DUH.
>> But the utter inability to say, "If it goes here ALL of these settings
>>apply UNLESS I say otherwise" is a LIMITATION, not an ASSET.
>What's all the yelling for?
Uh, the fact that you haven't grasped the concept yet.
>> >> to multiple accounts. They assume that an individual wants
>> >>everything to be lumped together, filtered out from there, and then
>> >>have to fight the MUA to get the right address.
>>
>> >But, again, my mail isn't all lumped together.
>>
>> Yes, it is. It all gets lumped into your incoming mailbox and filtered
>>from there. That is the EXACT same behavior as Eudora/Outlook/et al
>>except that instead of the MUA doing the filtering it is procmail doing
>>the filtering. Follow the path, you're supposedly a sysadmin, figure
>>it out.
>No it doesn't.
Yes, it does.
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ \--barmail
>>
>> Remove procmail, the filters, and what do you have?
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]/var/spool/mail/foobar
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
>You're a loon: remove the filters from PM98 and all your mail goes into one
>box as well. So what?
100% wrong. If I remove the filters from PMMail the mail from the
different accounts go into the respective inboxes. Mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes
into [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s inbox. Mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] goes into [EMAIL PROTECTED]'s inbox.
No filters required because each account is a COMPLETE and SEPERATE entity
with its OWN filters, its OWN inbox, its OWN outbox, its OWN drafts folder,
its OWN sent-mail, et al.
>> Gee, looks like a single collection point to me that, from there, is
>> FILTERED OUT.
>And if you remove pm98 from your setup you have no mail at all! What are you
>trying to prove?
What I have proven. That your method lumps all the mail into a single
location whereupon you must then filter it out with a patchwork of hacks which
is identical to the behavior of the MUAs you dismissed in the beginning!
>> Create a new mailbox. Does it have your address on it by default?
>>Nope. You now have to exit mutt, edit the rc file, go back in, check
>>to see if it worked. If not, repeat.
>Actually, it does.
My apologies, I meant the address that you want on it. Obviously if that
is your default address it will work. However, if it is from one of your
non-default addresses it does not.
>Then explain how effective your MUA based vacation program is when you're on
>vacation. :)
I did. You made the assumption that I shut down my MUA.
>> Yes, you do. Remove procmail/filter/Exim's filters and where does it
>>go? A single location. Without those filters it all goes into one
>>location. With the filters it is seperated out. This behavior is
>>identical to Eudora/Outlook et al. They have filters to move stuff
>>into different folders. NO difference. NONE.
>Do less caffeine.
And this refutes my point because..... Oh, wait, it doesn't. Grow up.
>I could say the same for you: you're the one who believes that 'account' is
>the same as 'mailbox' -- again, some of us have lots of mailboxes
>(personally, I have a couple or three dozen that I actually use, or at least
>let fill up with mail). Not all are 'accounts' at all -- why should all mail
>to my toy domain be treated equally? Each address there is deliverable, each
>with its own mailbox... but there's no "account" at all associated with them.
>No entry in the password file, no pop3 or IMAP 'inbox'.
And mine are no different. What you call a "mailbox" is an "accounts" to
me. I can do the same.
>I can make up addresses on the fly, the mail gets delivered properly and when
>I respond to it, my return address is properly set -- automatically.
I can do the same.
>You seem to be the one stuck in the "dark ages" where all mailboxes were tied
>to accounts. Mine aren't. Why are yours?
You're the one who wants to sit here and be forced to configure every
little detail on a mailbox per mailbox basis without a way to have all
folders and subfolders of a particular account (read: ADDRESS if you want to
be an utter prick about it) inherit COMMON features from its parents. You
think that the only one true way to do things is your way. Hacking is good,
but not when it is the *ONLY* way to do things, esp. when it makes the SIMPLE
things *HARD*.
>Feel free to have the last word once you chill out: I'm not wasting further
>time explaining to some bigotted fool that his preconceived notions are
>wrong.
Wow, what an accurate description of yourself!
--
Steve C. Lamb | I'm your priest, I'm your shrink, I'm your
ICQ: 5107343 | main connection to the switchboard of souls.
===============================+=============================================
------------------------------
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)
From: Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 13 May 1999 04:05:04 -0700
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
>>>>> "Peter" == Peter Seebach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Peter> In article
Peter> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Marco
Peter> Anglesio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> And so have I. And we both benefit from the existence of a
>> social welfare system that makes sure that we do not starve
>> without an employer/master.
Peter> I'm not sure I agree. I think that, as a whole, we're
Peter> worse off.
You remind me of a remark by Samuel Johnson in 1763:
"The notion of liberty amuses the people of England, and helps to keep
off the taedium vitae. When a butcher tells you that his heart bleeds
for his country he has, in fact, no uneasy feeling."
Peter> The fact is, I know very few people who have been
Peter> substantially helped by that system, and I know a lot who
Peter> would be a lot more free to leave their current employment
Peter> if they hadn't had a substantial chunk of their paychecks
Peter> taken away from them for "reemployment insurance" for their
Peter> entire working lives.
Really. Then, I suspect you know very few people who actually work
for a living.
Peter> It sounds nice; in practice, I suspect that far too much of
Peter> the money goes into paperwork, and far too little actually
Peter> does any good.
Peter> (For that matter, until recently, the U.S. welfare system
Peter> discouraged people from finding employment that didn't pay
Peter> substantially better than welfare.)
Yeah, the idea behind "welfare reform" was to force people to do
without at at minimum-wage job instead of doing without on a gov't
check. Well, the chickens haven't come to roost on that one, yet.
I'm sure you're tickled by the thought of even more kids left to fend
for themselves because their mothers <have> to work and childcare only
goes to those with the money to pay. Is it safe to say you've never
actually known anyone who was on welfare? Probably.
mp
- --
powered by GNU/linux since Sept 1997 Penguin spoken here
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.trollope.org
Michael Powe Portland, Oregon USA
"Would John the Baptist have lost his head if his name was Steve?"
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: GnuPG v0.9.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Encrypted with Mailcrypt 3.5.1 and GNU Privacy Guard
iD8DBQE3OrHT755rgEMD+T8RAl+uAJ0UU4KKpCUTGLOTO3uAOMKmuHrwlgCfR+9P
cWhKSj8ygbc9UczA6oBRi08=
=Eh+f
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
From: Rob Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ken Thompson on Linux
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 08:26:16 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> : What I mean is this: In the
> : corporate world people will pay very large sums of money for guaranteed
> : reliability and someone to shout at when things go wrong.
>
> And what do they really get for those large sums? Guaranteed
> response, i.e., someone to shout at.
That's what I said. I know as well as anyone that free software can be
as good as, or sometimes better than its commercial equivalent, and that
the help I can get from digging through source code or posting on USEnet
can be far more helpful than what I might get from my vendor over the
phone, but I'm a techie, and my opinion counts for nothing.
> But every software contract from
> large vendors has disclaimers that the vendor isn't liable for bugs.
> There's no guarantee of reliability.
No, but to management free software presents a guarantee of
unreliability. "If it's any good they'd be selling it." I know that's
wrong, you know that's wrong, but most people I've worked for don't.
> : My original point was that NT has a stranglehold on the desktop and is
> : fast taking over the low-end server market,
>
> Check your data. The most recent data that I saw showed Unix losing
> ground in the server market, NT holding steady, and Linux making
> significant gains.
I haven't seen that one. Yesterday I read a report claiming Sun and HP
had larges gains in the server market, followed by the evil empire. No
need to cite references though (please!) I'm quite happy to believe you.
> Saddled with low oil prices and a need to cut costs, global oil
> giant Amerada Hess Corp. is saving millions of dollars by replacing
> a costly IBM super-computer with high-end parallel clusters running
> Linux ...
That IBM is more than likely 20 years old don't forget. That's great
though, and I hope it's an unqualified success. Despite what I've said
(I've been playing Devil's advocate really) I want Linux to succeed -
after all, I make my living out of Unix - but I just don't share many
people's optimism.
Rob
------------------------------
From: "Mikael Wetterstrand" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.protocols.nfs,comp.os.linux.help,alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.networking,comp.os.linux.questions
Subject: fdisk /MBR ???
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 13:09:27 +0200
Hello
Well, I just wanna know what the command /mbr does?
I know u can use it with fdisk to "get ridd of" Lilo , but what does it
really do?
------------------------------
From: TedC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: information on "how to make a bootable linux cdrom"... or?
Date: 13 May 1999 07:32:40 GMT
i am looking for information on creating bootable linux cdroms. i am using
EasyCD Creator under windows 95. any information will be appreciated...
TedC
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: "Ferdinand V. Mendoza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Need Presentation Graphics Software
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 15:12:11 +0400
Jack,
You can still run MS Powerpoint inside Linux with out wine.
There's only a price you have to pay though.
Try to investigate this one:
http://www.vmware.com
There is an evaluation copy you can download.
I'm playing with it now and it works quite good
on my PII 400.
Ferdinand
Jack Steen wrote:
> I work for a company which makes UNIX based engineering desktop
> applications. We recently ported our flagship product to Linux and I run
> it on RH 5.2 on a laptop. Often during sales presentations I need to
> display slides a la MS Powerpoint or SGI Showcase. I am unaware of any
> software to do this under Linux. Can anyone suggest something? Any
> comments from experienced users would be welcome.
>
> BTW, I read in several postings here that WINE was not really a good
> alternative running Powerpoint, but if that will work I am willing to
> give it a try.
>
> Thanks in advance.......
>
> Jack Steen
> Dynamic Graphics
> Houston, Texas
------------------------------
From: "Ferdinand V. Mendoza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Telnet to WINE/Linux App Server Running Office97
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 15:15:27 +0400
Try http://www.vmware.com
Brian Eckrose wrote:
> Is it possible to run Office97 on a Linux/WINE application server from a
> remote system via a telnet session (with X display exported)?
>
> Thank you.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (fred smith)
Subject: Re: Linux finally
Date: Wed, 12 May 1999 22:09:13 GMT
Gerald Willmann ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: On Thu, 13 May 1999, Brad wrote:
: [...]
: > My problem is with Netscape. Stuff on the web looks fine when viewed
: > with Netscape but Netscape itself looks like hell. There is NO colour in
: > it at all. It's all grey with black writing and graphics. Not even a
: > shade of grey in the image just under the menu bar. All black.
: > Is this something I can fix or is this the way Netscape looks in Linux?
: > I would find that hard to believe.
: netscape doesn't seem to work well in 24 bpp color depth. Switch back to
: 16 or increase to 32 and all should be fine. You can do this by changing
: the default color depth in your XF86Config file.
I've seen other people say this, too (not to mention some people have
said the WP 8.0 doesn't work in 24 bit color), but both netscrape and
WP 8.0 work fine on my system in 24 bit color.
My guess, based on that scanty evidence, is that it may be a bug/feature
of the particular X server you're running, or of the way it handles your
particular video card. I'm using an ATI Xpert98 PCI card and as I said
24-bit is fine here.
But nevertheless, try it in 16-bit or 32-bit and see if it is better.
Fred
--
---- Fred Smith -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------
The eyes of the Lord are everywhere,
keeping watch on the wicked and the good.
============================= Proverbs 15:3 (niv) =============================
------------------------------
From: Rob Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Did someone say sudo? (was 'Is Unix a single user operating
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 11:58:09 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Can someone please expand on 'sudo'
It's a package which lets users execute commands as if they were other
users, even root. The administrator can choose exactly what programs any
user can run in this way, so you may give groups of users /some/
superuser priveliges, without letting them get their hands on anything
dangerous or having to share the root passwd around. It's an extremely
powerful, flexible and useful thing to have on your system, so long as
you set it up carefully.
The home page is at http://www.courtesan.com/sudo/.
Rob
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Proper use of /usr/local (Re: The Best Linux distribution?)
Date: 12 May 1999 23:37:09 -0500
In article <7hdh9r$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alexander Viro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>You put your own local programs into ports?
>
>Why not? It's not a rocket science. BTDT. Both on FreeBSD and Debian. Takes
>(oh horror!) 20 minutes on each. *Lazy* 20 minutes. BTW, I suspect that even
>with RPM it's not a rocket science.
And for the Solaris boxes?
>>I really don't want to track every program that other people are
>>maintaining, I want to upgrade everything to the newest in one shot
>>and be done for a while. That means I'll blow away the package
>>database anyway and then put my own programs back if necessary.
>
>Barbarian. WTF would you do it? Let me guess: each time you are going
>to rebuild your programs you are blowing away all object files and doing
>complete recompile, right? Les, meet make. Make, meet Les. Decent package
>management system should be able to do upgrade in place with minimal
>interaction on your part and minimal rebuild/download/reinstall efforts.
Errr, my own source uses make and cvs where appropriate. I don't
see the advantage of adding gunk that works differently on every
box on top of that. And the strictly local stuff is small enough
that it is generally not worth keeping work directories around
between installs.
>Preferably from cron task. Of three packaging systems in question RPM
>is the only one unable to do that. Both dpkg/dselect/apt and ports can
>do it quite fine.
Yow! Maybe if we go about five years without anyone mentioning new
bugs introduced by an update I'll think about auto-installing them
into a production system. Otherwise you are dreaming. There is
something called autorpm that offers the capability if I wanted it.
>>> This isn't Linux; We don't have random a.out vs ELF, g?libc[0-9],
>>> etc BS to deal with after a system upgrade.
>>
>>I have no problems with that under Linux. There were some versions
>>where the compatibility libs were broken. I don't use those versions.
>
>RedHat released two beta versions as stable. 5.0 and 5.1. After that they
>got a stable tree (5.2). Funny thing being, if you will compare them with
>the contemporaneous snapshots of Debian -unstable you'll see that amount
>of problems was more or less same. Except that RH had put their betas as
>public releases.
What's your point here? Everybody has bugs in every version. If you
don't believe it you just aren't paying attention. But, the bugs
in 5.0/5.1 where mostly avoided if you installed everything from
scratch instead of upgrading piecemeal from earlier versions. If you
have kept your own stuff separate, this is easier anyway.
>If you are running -unstable/-CURRENT/RawHide(or how the
>heck does RH call their *official* unstable tree) you are expected to
>meet bugs, broken dependencies, etc. But not with the public releases.
I suppose if it is the first time you've ever loaded an operating
system you might expect it to be perfect. Most of us are no longer
so naive. Before you jump to any conclusions about these being
just Linux bugs, note that I am replacing other systems with the
usual old bugs with current Linux boxes that are better, but I
still don't expect them to be perfect. As such, I expect to replace
them again in the future and I'd like that to be as painless as
possible whether or not it is a related distribution. I don't see
how spending time building a packaging scheme that might not work
with the next operating system fits into this scenario.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Martijn Kruithof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Telnet to WINE/Linux App Server Running Office97
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 13:36:55 +0200
"Ferdinand V. Mendoza" wrote:
> Try http://www.vmware.com
>
> Brian Eckrose wrote:
>
> > Is it possible to run Office97 on a Linux/WINE application server from a
> > remote system via a telnet session (with X display exported)?
> >
> > Thank you.
Is it possible to run Office 97 on a Linux/Wine platform?
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
