Linux-Misc Digest #297, Volume #20 Fri, 21 May 99 22:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: A Capitalists view of freedom (Jim Richardson)
Re: How many operating systems can i have on a linux pc? (GEDEOND)
TNT2 and X (was: Linux on Dual Pentium-II machines) (Vlad Karpinsky)
Re: LSL problems? ("Cameron Spitzer")
Re: NT the best web platform? (mlw)
Re: Linux Textbook? (Marc D. Bumble)
Oracle8i for Linux / MySQL 3.22.22 RPMs specifically for Redhat 6.0 (Glibc-2.1 /
kernel 2.2) ("Yesterday")
Re: SETI comparisons (Fred Kuipers)
Re: A Capitalists view of freedom (Pan)
Re: AutoInstall is for experts, not beginners!!! ("Anthony W. Youngman")
Re: UDMA under Linux 2.2.5 on Asus P5A-b (Ali M15xx chipset) ("Gene Heskett")
Re: Real-time data ("J. S. Jensen")
Re: SETI comparisons ("Chester Raffoon")
Re: Pro-Unix vs anti-WinTel (was: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?)
(david parsons)
Re: unseen files (Williams)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Capitalists view of freedom
Date: 22 May 1999 00:10:14 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 20 May 1999 17:25:51 -0700,
Pan, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>>
>> >Unfortunately, they do. Your chance of death by shooting in the
>> >U.S. is about a factor of 5 higher than in comparable countries with
>> >gun control. The school shootings are just an insignificant top of
>> >the iceberg.
>>
>> *bzzt* wrong answer, thank you for playing.
>> The claim was, that having a gun, would be of little or no use for defence
>> because the thug has the drop on you. Of course, as the poster you are
>> replying to pointed out, the statistics do not bear this claim out.
>> Your answer was entirely irrelevent to this claim. But Ill shoot it
>> down anyway.
>>
>> A) There are no comparable countries to the US, this is one thing that
>> makes comparisons difficult at least.
>
>American children aged 14 and younger are 16 times more likely to be
>killed by firearms than are children in
>25 other industrialized nations averaged together, according to the
>Centers for Disease Control and
>Prevention.
Given that there are < 1500 accidental firearms deaths in these US
total, per annum, and the vast majority of them are >18, this is a curious
figure. Does it inlude homicide? suicide?
What are the total death rates, from _all_ sources, for this age group
in US and out? that would seem to be more relevent, unless somehow, firearms
deaths are "worse" than say drownings...
>
>There is nothing difficult about making that comparison.
>
>
Sure there is, economic, cultural differences.
>>
>> The US are not a homogenized society. We are very much
>> a mix of cultures and people, and much social friction
>> results from this.
>
>Data indicate that murder is most often intraracial among
>victims and offenders. In 1997, data based on incidents
>involving one victim and one offender show that 94 percent of
>85 percent of white murder victims were killed by white
>offenders. (Crime in the United States, Uniform Crime Reports, 1997, p.
>16. Washington, DC:
>U.S. Department of Justice.)
Glad you brought that up, did you read the bit in that report about
which ethnicities had the lowest per capita homicide rates, and which
the highest? For reasons that have nothing to do with genetics, and a
lot to do with economic and cultural factors, Caucasions have approx
the same homicide rate in the US, as in western europe. About 2 per 100k
The vast majority (per capita wise) of violent criminals in the US are
minorities.
>Even factoring for "social friction" due to race and ethnicity, the
>murder rate in the United States is many
>times that of other first world nations.
>
>> B) Even within these United States, the homicide rate varies greatly
>> from state to state, and county/city to county or city.
>
>> Allmost all of them saw a drop
>> greater than the drop in the non-carry states
>
>"The surge in violent crime in the Nation over the past decade
>correspond with a significant rise in the usage of firearms by the
>criminal population." (section V, 1995
>UCR, opening paragraph)
>
from 1985 to 1995, did the US see a drop in homicide or not... you are
being alittle unclear here.
>Percent Change in the use of weapon types in murders from 1985 versus
>1994
>
>Knives and cutting instruments -25.6%
>Firearms + 46.3%
>
hmm, so all the gun laws passed from 1985 to 1994 had no effect...
impressive
>
>> . (you did
>> know that out homicide rate is dropping, while that of
>> many western European's is rising, didn't you?)
>
>In 1996, according to the uniform crime report, the rate of murder and
>non-negligent manslaughter, last year
>was 7.4 per 100,000. In 1997, it was 6.8 per 100,000. That is on order
>of 4-7 times the murder rate in any
>other first world country. Though the rates of murder and non-negligent
>manslaughter have dropped since
>1994, they were still significantly higher (per capita) in 1997 than
>they were in 1985.
>
>> C) Of the homicides in the US, gun related or other, the vast
>> majority of the perpetrators are violent criminals with
>> long records, why are they out? most of them have served
>> time for crimes past. Many are out on parole or other
>> early release. The "average" Joe, just isn't a murderer.
>
>Where data on relationships between murderer and victim has been
>established, roughly 75% of all murder
>victims knew their killer.
>25% of them were related. Guns make it very easy to kill someone in a
>rash act.
>
which says _zip_ about criminal backgrounds, doesn't it?
Or are you asserting that criminals have no family, and never marry?
>
>> over 1 billion rounds of ammo fired in the US annually, <1500
>> accidental deaths.
>
>20000 people were killed in the US by firearms last year.
>That number is roughly the equivalent to the population of an average
>sized state university.
>
I said in accidents, there are _not_ 200000 accidental firearms deaths
each year. Even including homicides, (as you did, did you include suicides as
well?) ,this is fewer than died in auto _accidents_ or medical
misadventure.
>Given where I live and work (westside Los angeles and downtown L.A.) My
>reality is that I worry a great deal
>more about getting killed as an accidental victim in a drive by shooting
>than I worry about needing a gun in
>case the second american revolution happens tomorrow. Owning a gun is
>not protection against being killed
>in a drive by.
nor is a fire extinguisher, doesn't make it useless to have though.
<followups set>
--
Jim Richardson
www.eskimo.com/~warlock
All hail Eris
"Linux, where do you want to go tomorrow?"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GEDEOND)
Subject: Re: How many operating systems can i have on a linux pc?
Date: 21 May 1999 16:38:03 GMT
As many as your disk drives can hold.
I have booted with LILO to DOS, Win95, Win31 and Linux.
Now I have Win95, Linux 4.2, Linux 5.2, and acouple test kernels to boot
into.
You need 2 5.1 GiG Disks so you can put 10 OS's on them --- ( That was a JOKE
- but it is possible ). The last operating system you put on will frustrate
you enough to toss the whole machine out the window - mine almost went the
day!!
Good Luck ... Dave.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
From: Vlad Karpinsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: TNT2 and X (was: Linux on Dual Pentium-II machines)
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 00:43:35 GMT
On Fri, 21 May 1999, Ralph Wesseling wrote:
> maybe becuase I haven't done much with it yet, and now that I have placed
> anTNT2 in their I can't even use half the programs I normally would as I
> can't start up X.
There is one trick to make TNT2 cards running under X.
Just add one option to your XF86Config in Section "Device":
Chipset "RIVATNT"
SVGA X server can't recognize TNT2 by default, but TNT2 is just
advanced version of TNT, so that option will point X server to the right
direction. Of course you should have installed latest XF86_SVGA X server
(XFree86 3.3.3.1). It is working just fine for me.
Vlad Karpinsky mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Cameron Spitzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: LSL problems?
Date: 22 May 1999 00:39:39 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Flyboy105 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Hey all. Has anyone had problems with LSL?? I have ordered RH 6 twice from
>them, both by Priority Mail and neither has arrived. This has been some time
>ago since I ordered too, like 2-3 weeks.
Linux Systems Labs has always shipped my order within a few days,
and they have always been accurate.
Sometimes I get unlabeled disks, with only a small label on the sleeve,
and have to mark them with a laundry pen before I forget which they
are, but what do you expect for a dollar a disk.
Your problem is probably Priority Mail. They used to be more reliable
than UPS or FedEx, but the USPS has gone to shit in the last few
years. Use *any* other shipper next time.
Cameron
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT the best web platform?
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 16:57:52 +0000
Stuart Fox wrote:
>
> So IIS on NT is faster because it was implemented better?
>
No, the system they configured was superior to Linux because they used
native language components in NT and interpreted language components in
Linux and Solaris.
Had they just pitted the results of raw server performance that would be
different test altogether. They didn't, they implemented a full server
environment based on various technologies. It is more of a test of their
choices than it is about IIS and NT vs Apache and UNIX.
If the tests were implemented using raw disk pages to client, that would
have been a test. As it was, there was so much between Apache and the
client, I am suprised it did as well as it did.
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 95, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Take the Mohawk Software Computer Survey at: www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux Textbook?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marc D. Bumble)
Date: 21 May 1999 12:27:40 -0400
Tom,
You might consider switching to the FreeBSD system for class and local
workstations/PCs. For that systems, the text "The Design and
Implementation of the 4.4 BSD Operating System" by Marshall Kirk
McKusick et al. is a very good choice for a classroom based OS text.
You could throw Tanenbaum's MOS or Silberschatz's OS text as
additional references. At least thats what I think I would do?
marc
>>>>> "Tom" == Tom Eisenmenger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tom> We've begun to cover Linux in the community college where I
Tom> teach. Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a textbook
Tom> I really like for my students. I'd like your
Tom> recommendations, given the following criteria:
Tom> (1) The textbook must have a variety of exercises at the end
Tom> of each chapter, although an instructor's solution manual is
Tom> not required. I'd prefer that the text not be a "self-help"
Tom> guide where answers are readily available for the student.
Tom> (2) The book should be written on a freshman level (i.e. for
Tom> the casual user, not an administrator).
Tom> I used "Linux A-Z" this past session, but was not altogether
Tom> happy with it. I'll use it again if I must, but I hope I can
Tom> find something more appropriate. I'll be attending the Linux
Tom> Expo tomorrow and will check out the exhibitors, hoping to
Tom> find a good text. In the meantime, I'll appreciate your
Tom> suggestions. Thanks!
Tom> -- Tom Eisenmenger
/++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++/
Marc Bumble Computer Science and Engineering
University Internet address: http://trantor.cse.psu.edu/~bumble/
University Office Address: Computer Science and Engineering
Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
======== Over 73,000 Newsgroups = Including Dedicated Binaries Servers =======
------------------------------
From: "Yesterday" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Oracle8i for Linux / MySQL 3.22.22 RPMs specifically for Redhat 6.0
(Glibc-2.1 / kernel 2.2)
Crossposted-To:
comp.databases.oracle.misc,comp.databases.oracle.server,comp.databases,linux.redhat.misc,alt.linux,alt.os.linux
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 16:02:41 GMT
1) Does anyone have their Oracle8i for Linux cd-rom yet?
2) Where can I get MySQL 3.22.22 RPMs specifically for Redhat 6.0 Linux?
------------------------------
From: Fred Kuipers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SETI comparisons
Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 01:24:23 GMT
Hey all:
I would like to redirect the output of the linux version of seti@home to a
file so I can do some stuff with the output. However, every attempt to redirect
the output results in a 0-byte file as if it's offended with the idea. Here's
what I tried:
./setidirect > setilog
And all I get is a 0 -byte file... Any suggestions or could it be a bug??
thx
FJK
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Carl Hilinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > For those of you who don't know, you can participate in the Search for
> > Extraterrestrial Intelligence (God knows you won't find any of that around
> > here) by going to http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu. What you get is a
> > 107-second chunk of space chatter for your computer to chomp on while it's
> > not working for you.
>
> > It's quite an eye-opener as related to processors and computing power. My
> > 350PII with 64mb took 43 hours to work on this running Win98. My Linux box,
> > running a Cyrix 233MMX with 64mb, took only 23 hours to do its chunk.
>
> Ok -- this is fun. I've got dual PII450's and 512MB of RAM. I always
> have two client processes running nice'd to 15. Using the glibc1 version
> of the client, my work-units take about 9.5-10 hours. I haven't left
> my machine in NT long enough to let it finish a work unit yet, although
> it would be interesting since the client maxes out both CPU's under NT.
>
> The other fun thing to note is that while Linux is still fully responsive
> with two clients running, NT is _very_ noticeably laggy with the client
> running. To be able to work at all, I had to limit the process to one
> CPU. I'll have to try lowering the priority of the client while leaving it
> on both CPU's and seeing if that makes any difference...
>
> --
> ------------------------------------
> Joshua Baker-LePain
> Department of Biomedical Engineering
> Duke University
------------------------------
From: Pan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: talk.politics.guns,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: A Capitalists view of freedom
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 18:42:26 -0700
Jim Richardson wrote:
> >American children aged 14 and younger are 16 times more likely to be
> >killed by firearms than are children in
> >25 other industrialized nations averaged together, according to the
> >Centers for Disease Control and
> >Prevention.
>
> Given that there are < 1500 accidental firearms deaths in these US
> total, per annum, and the vast majority of them are >18, this is a curious
> figure. Does it inlude homicide? suicide?
I include all children aged 14 and younger who were killed by guns.
frankly, after reviewing my comments, the discussion sickens me. 20,000
people are killed each year in the United States by firearms.
> What are the total death rates, from _all_ sources, for this age group
> in US and out? that would seem to be more relevent, unless somehow, firearms
> deaths are "worse" than say drownings...
Relevent is the amount of children people like yourself, knowingly or
not, are willing to sacrifice to protect your right to own a firearm.
Easy access to firearms is a cause of a lot of deaths that would not
otherwise have occured. try and twist some rather incontavertable
statistics all that you'd like, the bottom line is that guns make it
much easier to kill people than knives and other weapons, and for that
reason, the vast majority of murders in the U.S. involve their use. It
takes some real effort and stomach to bludgeon or stab someone to
death. Pulling a trigger from 10 feet to 250 yards away is not so
difficult.
> >There is nothing difficult about making that comparison.
> >
> >
>
> Sure there is, economic, cultural differences.
There is also a political and legal one that far exceeds those. Easy
access to firearms.
> >> The US are not a homogenized society. We are very much
> >> a mix of cultures and people, and much social friction
> >> results from this.
> >
> >Data indicate that murder is most often intraracial among
> >victims and offenders. In 1997, data based on incidents
> >involving one victim and one offender show that 94 percent of
> >85 percent of white murder victims were killed by white
> >offenders. (Crime in the United States, Uniform Crime Reports, 1997, p.
> >16. Washington, DC:
> >U.S. Department of Justice.)
>
> Glad you brought that up, did you read the bit in that report about
> which ethnicities had the lowest per capita homicide rates, and which
> the highest? For reasons that have nothing to do with genetics, and a
> lot to do with economic and cultural factors, Caucasions have approx
> the same homicide rate in the US, as in western europe. About 2 per 100k
Actually, in cases where ethnicity can be determined, the number of
caucasians murdered is closer to 4 per 100k which is 2.5-7 times higher
than in ANY western European country.
> The vast majority (per capita wise) of violent criminals in the US are
> minorities.
That is simply inaccurate. African Americans have the highest per
capita murder rate (roughly 53% of all murders distributed among
slightly less than 25% of the total population) followed by caucasians
who account for 45% of all murders and roughly 45% of the U.S.
population.
> >"The surge in violent crime in the Nation over the past decade
> >correspond with a significant rise in the usage of firearms by the
> >criminal population." (section V, 1995
> >UCR, opening paragraph)
> >
>
> from 1985 to 1995, did the US see a drop in homicide or not... you are
> being alittle unclear here.
There was an increase, per capita. for both murder and gun-related
violent crime from 1985 through 1995.
> >Knives and cutting instruments -25.6%
> >Firearms + 46.3%
> >
>
> hmm, so all the gun laws passed from 1985 to 1994 had no effect...
> impressive
I don't believe that we can show a direct cause and effect between
particular legislation and its social consequence with regard to violent
crime. However, if you want to play that game, I'll point out that the
Brady law was passed in 1994 and both gun related violent crime and
gun-related murder dropped the next 3 consecutive years and had dropped
through mid year 1998, which is the most recent data available in the
UCR.
> >Where data on relationships between murderer and victim has been
> >established, roughly 75% of all murder
> >victims knew their killer.
> >25% of them were related. Guns make it very easy to kill someone in a
> >rash act.
> >
>
> which says _zip_ about criminal backgrounds, doesn't it?
> Or are you asserting that criminals have no family, and never marry?
By definition, anyone who murders is part of the criminal population so
your statement is trivially true. What I am saying is that criminal or
not, guns make it much easier to kill people in a rash act.
> >
> >> over 1 billion rounds of ammo fired in the US annually, <1500
> >> accidental deaths.
> >
> >20000 people were killed in the US by firearms last year.
> >That number is roughly the equivalent to the population of an average
> >sized state university.
> >
>
> I said in accidents, there are _not_ 200000 accidental firearms deaths
> each year.
So the other 18,500 deaths caused by the discharge of firearms don't get
included in your billion round statistic? I would hazard to guess that
Americans were more successful at killing each other last year, per
bullet fired, than the U.S. forces were successful at killing enemy
troops in Vietnam, per bullet fired.
------------------------------
From: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: AutoInstall is for experts, not beginners!!!
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 01:14:43 +0100
Reply-To: "Anthony W. Youngman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes
>Richard Corfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> What it really needs is some way of helping get rid of those
>> libraries that were installed with something a long time ago and are
>> no longer needed as you got rid of that something or it changed
>> libraries since.
>>
>> Either some way of flagging things as auto-installed so they can be
>> auto-uninstalled when nothing depends on them any more or an
>> interface that shows whats at the top of the tree and what isn't so
>> any libraries at the top of the tree can be uninstalled by the user.
>
>"Nothing depends on them any more" isn't good enough; the sysadmin or
>users might have installed their own programs which depend on them,
>e.g. in /usr/local or their home directories, and this won't be
>recorded in package dependencies anywhere, so dselect (or whatever
>other package manager) couldn't know about it.
>
What I'd like to see - maybe defined in the LFSSTD or some other thing,
is a standard package database.
For example, we might have /etc/packages, and under that libs, database,
games ...
In each of those we have a directories called, eg glibc, MySQL, etc as
appropriate. The point is that the maintainer of the PROGRAM (not the
distribution package) dictates the form of the contents (within
constraints), so if I want glibc, I know exactly where to look to know
whether it is installed - and what version - and if I have say
fetchmail, I also know exactly where to look to find its list of
dependencies etc.
That gives quite a lot of flexibility to package people, but also makes
sure the buck stops in just one place - the person maintaining the
program.
--
Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk
Trousers with a single hole in their waistband are topologically equivalent
to a doughnut. These sugarcoated trousers have yet to catch on at fast-food
outlets! (SuperStrings by F. David Peat)
If replying by e-mail please mail wol. Anything else may get missed amongst
the spam.
------------------------------
Date: 21 May 99 20:52:25 -0500
From: "Gene Heskett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: UDMA under Linux 2.2.5 on Asus P5A-b (Ali M15xx chipset)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus
Reply to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gene Heskett sends Greetings to Peter Stein;
[...]
PS> So should this mean that the available 2.2.9 kernel sources contain
PS> these patches? I acquired the 2.2.9 kernel source and it most definitely
PS> does *NOT* contain the source added by the 2.2.9 UDMA patch.
I dunno why not, I grabbed 2.2.9 src the other night, and compiled
it on my 2.0.36 system (RH5.2).
It ran the drives quicker than stink in UDMA33 mode. Unforch, so much
other stuff broke that I ended up doing a reinstall of 5.2.
I'd also like to know what if any sensible reason exists for
rhs-printfilters, in its latest incarnation, that makes it also REQUIRE
the latest 2.1 whatever version of glibc because installing that breaks
the rest of the system. My printer works great, but what good is a
working printer when nothing else on the system works?
I've attempted to post several messages about this, but my ISP's
newsserver sends any original messages I make to /dev/null. For obvious
reasons, I haven't sucked any news from it in 9 months or so, but most
of the free newsservers *won't* let you post so I have to post thru
these jokers.
Anybody know a good, free newsserver that you can also post replies to?
PS> No, not the kernel source. I'm refering to patches 2.2.6->2.2.9.
You guys ever hear of www.freshmeat.net? It has pointers directly to
the 2.2.9-tar.gz copy of the full src.
Cheers, Gene
--
Gene Heskett, CET, UHK |Amiga A2k Zeus040 50 megs fast/2 megs chip
Ch. Eng. @ WDTV-5 |A2091,GuruRom,1g Seagate,CDROM,Multiface III
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or |Buddha + 4 gig WDC drive, 525 meg tape
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|Stylus Pro, EnPrint, Picasso-II, 17" vga
RC5-Moo! 22kkeys/sec isn't much, but it all helps
--
------------------------------
From: "J. S. Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Real-time data
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 10:27:32 -0600
siz wrote:
> How can I insert real-time data
You probably need a true real-time operating system ;-) Don't abuse the word
`real-time!'
> (dynamic data exchanges, etc.) into a C Linux program? Can someone refer to a
> good book or other reference?
You need to provide more information. Reading from a device? a scaled-time
read() on a file or select()ed file/device read?
--
J. S. Jensen
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.Paramin.COM
------------------------------
From: "Chester Raffoon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SETI comparisons
Date: Fri, 21 May 1999 21:03:33 -0400
>Just to clarify, you can choose to have the windows version running all
>the time (in the background) or only when the screensaver cuts in. If it
>is running all the time, then it only has a graphical display when you
>maximize its windows (out of the taskbar). You can also choose to have
>the screensaver display go blank after a certain amount of time. So
>the fairest test would be to set the code to run all the time and to
>set the blank screensaver setting to 0 (so that there is never a
>graphical display). To agree with others, I would assume that the
>difference is almost completely due to compilation differences, and not
>the OS.
I've done this on the Win98 box I am running (see my previous post for my
Linux/Win98/NT4 execution times) with no real difference in throughput.
This leaves two possible scenarios:
1: The Win32 coder did not recognize when the app was minimized and the
code path still did all the 16 bit GDI stuff to update the display, even
though it would go in the bit bucket.
2: Or Win32 really is as broken as it seems to be, which I find _very_ hard
to believe. NT should be doing much better.
No answers from [EMAIL PROTECTED] much to my regret. A console
version of setiathome for Win32 would really help answer these questions -
maybe the next (1.1) release for Win32?
Note for clarification: the Win95/98 and NT setiathome binaries are one and
the same - no difference in compilers/optimizations for the different Win32
platforms.
------------------------------
From: o r c @ p e l l . p o r t l a n d . o r . u s (david parsons)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: Re: Pro-Unix vs anti-WinTel (was: Re: Is Unix a single user operating system?)
Date: 21 May 1999 09:57:22 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On 19 May 1999 17:56:58 GMT, Jason T. Nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>Isn't popular yet? Oh dear. Please excuse me while I try and stiffle a
>>roaring guffaw.
>
> OK, I'm waiting. Stiiiilllll waiting. Well? No guffaw. Oh, could that
>be because FreeBSD's rise and fall cannot be calculated because the numbers
>just aren't there yet
Maybe. *BSD were delayed at the starting gate, and are probably
about two years behind Linux right now -- I'm starting to see the
occasional *BSD article in the computer gossip magazines, so
barring an outbreak of Unix self-destructiveness we'll be seeing
10 million *BSD seats sometime around 2002.
About time, too; when there are 40 or 50 million Linux seats and
10 million *BSD seats this will make even the most rabid MS devotee
perk up their ears and start thinking that this is a market they
should pay attention to.
____
david parsons \bi/ Of course by then you'll be seeing John Dyson
\/ vs Richard Stallman in cage matches on pay per
view.
------------------------------
From: Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: unseen files
Date: 20 May 1999 20:18:22 PDT
Michael Proto wrote:
>
> On Fri, 14 May 1999 18:01:29 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] muttered:
> >Howdy All,
> >
> >I'm having a problem with linux seeing files in the current directory. If I
> >use an application like vi to view a file, it has no problem seeing the file
> >and opening it in the current directory. However, if I compile the file and
> >then try to run it by just typing the name, the system says it can't be
> >found. I have to type the complete path to run the file, even though it is
> >in the directory I am currently in. Anybody have any suggestions?
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >John Gibbons
> >
> >
>
> If you are trying to run a file, make sure the execute bit is on. 'chmod
> +x path/filename' should fix it.
Make sure that your current directory is in your $PATH environment
variable. The PATH variable should include a segment with just
a dot in it.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
