Linux-Misc Digest #701, Volume #21 Mon, 6 Sep 99 13:13:11 EDT
Contents:
Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution ("Paul E. Bell")
Re: Peaceful Coexistence (Larry Ozarow)
Re: Linux+NT dsaster (help wanted) (Svend Olaf Mikkelsen)
Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie (Carl Fink)
HELP EAST TIMOR ("Armando Duarte")
Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution ("Paul E. Bell")
Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution (Jon Skeet)
Mouse problem in RH6 (Jouni Axelsson)
Re: How to address email without domain name? (M. Buchenrieder)
Re: From KDE back to Gnome??? (Mike Detlefsen)
Re: Will this ever change? (George Vlahoulis)
Re: xfstt and Redhat 6 (Bob Tennent)
Re: C vs C++ for Open Source projects (Johan Kullstam)
Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie (teknite)
Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie (teknite)
Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution (Guy Macon)
Re: Please Help me! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Paul E. Bell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.qnx,comp.sys.amiga.misc,comp.realtime
Subject: Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 08:53:08 -0500
First off, you were quoting the part I wrote, second, who is Russ, and
third, see my other reply to you.
Guy Macon wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kai Henningsen) wrote:
>
> > Well, the whole "convergeance" thing is supposedly to take computers and
> > make them as easy to use as TVs and VCRs.
>
> >I know, we all have seen the
> > odd consumer who can't run a TV or a VCR, or even a telephone, but
> > that't beside the point.
>
> Actually it is exactly the point. The majority of VCR owneres cannot
> set the VCR recording timers. Many can't set the clock. VCR's are
> usually TERRIBLE examples of "easy to use".
>
> If you want to see how it is indeed possible to make computers much
> easier to use, read THE INMATES ARE RUNNING THE ASYLUM. This book
> explains how software engineers design interfaces that only a software
> engineer could love, managers design interfaces that only a moron with
> a perfect memory could love, why the average user thinks that the
> problem is that they are stupid, and why so many engineers are
> apologists for hard to use software. It's an eye opener.
> avalable at amazon.com.
>
> Russ, if you buy this book and don't like it, I will buy it from
> you at twice what you paid for it.
--
Paul E. Bell Email and AIM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ifMUD: Helios | IRC: PKodon, DrWho4, and Helios
(I'd put my webpage here, if it had anything on it.)
_____ Pen Name/Arts & Crafts signature:
| | _ \ _ _ |/ _ _(
| | (_X (_/`/\ (_) (_` |\(_) (_) (_|_) (/`
)
------------------------------
From: Larry Ozarow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Peaceful Coexistence
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 14:57:24 GMT
Byron A Jeff wrote:
(I'm cutting to the chase here)
>
> Considering your concern with the Windows disk and the abject slowness of
> floppies, I think the LoadLin route is probably optimal for you.
>
I've been booting from floppies for a long time, because I'm just too
accident-prone
to trust myself with LILO. The floppy solution is actuall much FASTER than the
loadlin
approach, since using loadlin you first have to boot into Windows (pretty slow,
esp. Windows
98), then boot up into Linux which also takes a bit of time. Floppies are of
course slow, but
only a fraction of bootup time is taken up by reading in the kernel. Most of it
is sniffing
and setting up the hardware, etc. The floppy-reading part of bootup is much
shorter than
a full Windows boot would be.
Larry
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Svend Olaf Mikkelsen)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Linux+NT dsaster (help wanted)
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 15:08:19 GMT
"D. Emilio Grimaldo Tunon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Now since the install was done when you try to boot the laptop
>you get a black screen with "Invalid partition table" and nothing
>else. The only way to get the machine to boot is with the NT
>boot disk which then boots NT. We copied the boot.ini etc
>from the boot disk into C: but still the same results (it says
>to boot from partition 2).
You have two partitions set active. Boot to a dos floppy with
fdisk.exe and set active partition. NT Disk Administrator might be
able to do it, but the fdisk solution I have tested.
--
Svend Olaf
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Carl Fink)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie
Date: 6 Sep 1999 14:28:53 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 12:44:24 +0000 Morton, Andrew [WOLL:4009-M:EXCH]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>#!/bin/sh
>umount /mnt/floppy
>while true
>do
> if mount /mnt/floppy
> then
> umount /mnt/floppy
> killall X
> fi
> sleep 10
>done
>
>Run it as root. When your X server hangs up, just push in the floppy
>disk and wait a few seconds.
Wouldn't this be hitting the floppy drive every ten seconds?
--
Carl Fink [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"This fool wishes to reverse the entire science of astronomy."
-Martin Luther on Copernicus' theory that the Earth orbits the sun
------------------------------
From: "Armando Duarte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: HELP EAST TIMOR
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 13:53:35 +0100
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
=======_NextPart_000_00A0_01BEF86F.36CE4A60
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
--=20
===========================================
Armando Duarte
Centro Hospitalar de Coimbra (http://www.chc.min-saude.pt)
Departamento de Informa=E7=E3o para a Gest=E3o
Telef. 351 39 800080
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
=======_NextPart_000_00A0_01BEF86F.36CE4A60
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1" =
http-equiv=3DContent-Type>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 5.00.2014.210" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><BR>--=20
<BR>-------------------------------------------<BR>Armando =
Duarte<BR>Centro=20
Hospitalar de Coimbra (<A=20
href=3D"http://www.chc.min-saude.pt">http://www.chc.min-saude.pt</A>)<BR>=
Departamento=20
de Informa=E7=E3o para a Gest=E3o<BR>Telef. 351 39 800080<BR><A=20
href=3D"mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A></FO=
NT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2><BR></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>
=======_NextPart_000_00A0_01BEF86F.36CE4A60==
------------------------------
From: "Paul E. Bell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.qnx,comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 09:21:37 -0500
Guy Macon wrote:
>
> In article <7qvpr3$v0v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>(Joe Cosby) wrote:
> >
> >** To reply in e-mail, remove "rokwak." from address **
> >
> >Guy Macon hunched over his computer, typing feverishly;
> >thunder crashed, Guy Macon laughed madly, then wrote:
> >> In article <7qukv8$dvr$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joe Cosby) wrote:
> >>
> >> >If the basic concepts (what is a file, what is a program, GUI
> >> >elements, directory structure) were introduced first, I think
> >> >real computer literacy would rise.
> >>
> >> This is the wrong direction to go. Files, programs, and directories
> >> are a classic case of the human interface being a one to one
> >> representation of the internal structure of the program. Calling a
> >> directory a Folder doesn't change that. I can learn how to drive
> >> a car or to use the telephone network without knowing the internal
> >> details. Who says that the way CP-M and Unix organized information
> >> is the most understandable for humans?
> >>
> >
> >Not the particular directory structure, but what is a 'directory
> >structure' at all.
> >
> >Given a mass storage device, files will be stored in a series of
> >directories, each directory can have subdirectories, etc.
>
> You are desribing the internal organization used by the system
> software. There is no reason why the human interface has to match
> the internal organization, and many reasons why you might want to
> organize the human interface differently. Look at what we are doing
> right now. This discussion is presented to me as newsgroups which
> contain articles. the directory structure and whether all the posts
> are seperate files or entries in a relational database. Look at the
> WWW. You and I know that it is based on Unix style directories, but
> many users only see hyperlinks and pages on their screens.
>
> >I'm talking about beginners, here.
>
> Me too.
>
> >People really don't know that. People can run Windows/MS software
> >and not know that.
>
> Nor do they have to. There was a time when you needed to understand
> spark advance to operate an automobile. Now it is quite possible
> to operate one without ever learning how to open the hood or to add
> gasoline to the tank.
>
> >People don't know what is going on when they 'start a program'.
> >They don't know what happens when you 'save a program'.
>
> Nor should they. When I work on a word processing document I am
> faced with the internal implementation detail of fast storage that
> dies when power is removed and doesn't require names (RAM) and
> slower storage that survives a power failure and requires filenames.
> Why should the user need to know any of this?
>
> >The human interface -should- be a one to one representation of the
> >system internals, economy and elegance are -always- preferable.
> >
> >An automobile driver presses the gas to accelerate, releases the
> >gas to cease adding power, presses the brake to decelerate, turns
> >the wheel to direct the car. There is a one to one relation
> >between the interface and the major functions of the system.
>
> There is a a one to one relation between the interface and the
> functions that the user needs to do (stop, go, steer), but there
> is not a one to one relation between the interface and the internal
> implementation details. Manual shifting is a good example of a one
> to one relation between the interface and the internal implementation
> details, and manual shifting makes it harder to learn how to drive.
> An ideal car would be an automatic that a power user could switch
> into manual shifting mode. An ideal car would also not give you
> two seperate ways to shed speed with different interfaces (brakes
> and engine braking). An ideal car would have the brake pedal control
> the brakes and the compression braking (with a power user mode that
> gives full control).
>
> >Even something as basic as 'how is data stored' can go a very long
> >way towards making a computer operator, however dullwitted, a much
> >better operator. When I first ran a Wintel, I had been using an
> >Amiga for years. It took me no time to find programs, run them,
> >store files, retrieve files, etc. These things take some people
> >months, and many people never really understand it. The basics
> >are universal (plus or minus a GUI).
>
> Why should you have to find programs? Why should you be aware of
> the existance of a hard disk?
>
> You REALLY need to read THE INMATES ARE RUNNING THE ASYLUM. It's
> amazon.com's best selling software development book. It even describes
> what an apologist is, which fits you (and me, before I read the book!)
> very well. Look into it. There is a better way to do things.
This book may be well and good, but I don't think it covers some things
that should be covered with computers (and no, I have not read it).
>From the sound of what you are saying, computers and their interfaces
should be such that, like on Star Trek, we just say, "Computer, write my
resume and send it to Starfleet," and it's done. The only thing is,
even on Star Trek, they have a concept that the information they are
working with is stored as individual bits and pieces somewhere in there,
and that there are protocols used in retrieving that information, or
creating new information. The data and programs don't just happen.
To listen to you, a computer user should not care why his computer
doesn't work, no matter whether he forgot to save his data, accidentally
moved an icon to the trashcan, deleted a file necessary to the working
of a program, had a hard drive crash, had a surge wipe out his modem, or
had lightning hit his computer and kill it. Just bring it into the shop
and say, "It doesn't work, fix it." For all I know, the guy changed the
icon image for his word processor to a duck and can't remember that he
did that.
In other words, the car owner (to follow the logic above) should not
need to know the difference between running out of gas, having a flat
tire, being out of oil (and locking up the engine), or having a dead
battery because he left his lights on or his charging system is not
working. He shouldn't notice these things, or try to figgure out what
is wrong, just call the tow truck to haul his car to the shop and have
it fixed.
So, what's wrong with car owners knowing how to change a wheel on their
car, put gas and oil in, wash the windows once in a while, etc.; what's
wrong with computer owners knowing the basics about maintaining thier
computer.
When you go to the library, you have to learn enough about how books are
stored to find the one you want (unless you always ask the librarian to
find one for you - computers are not that intuitive, yet). It also
helps to know how to read the language the book is written in. If you
want to make a new book to put into the library, it helps to know how to
write.
General purpose computers do so many things, and Wintel computers have
so many ways of doing them, that it behoves a new user to figgure out
even how to turn them on and off. It was much simpler when there was a
clearly labeled switch, with an "ON" position and an "OFF" position.
Now, on the latest offerings in the PC world, one button does it all:
put the computer to sleep, wake it up; if it locks up, hold the button
longer, it will eventually shut down completely; if that fails, pull the
plug (and _this_ is better than that switch?).
I believe that, having a clearly labeled button for doing something
(ON/OFF) is much better and easier to understand than a button that does
it all. I don't believe that the user should be shielded from knowing
that the data they are creating/accessing is stored somewhere, or where
that somewhere is.
Gotta go, will probably continue this later.
--
Paul E. Bell Email and AIM: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ifMUD: Helios | IRC: PKodon, DrWho4, and Helios
(I'd put my webpage here, if it had anything on it.)
_____ Pen Name/Arts & Crafts signature:
| | _ \ _ _ |/ _ _(
| | (_X (_/`/\ (_) (_` |\(_) (_) (_|_) (/`
)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jon Skeet)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.qnx,comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 15:28:19 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 04-Sep-99 10:46:12 Juergen Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> JF> x-no-archive: yes
>
>
> Juergen, I don't believe your x-no-archive is making it into
> functionality.
>
> It seems to show up in the message body instead.
That's okay - I believe x-no-archive is supposed to be accepted if it's
either in headers or in the first line of the body.
--
Jon Skeet - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.pobox.com/~skeet/
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 15:44:45 +0200
From: Jouni Axelsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Mouse problem in RH6
Hmmm ... panic ..
I've tried to install RedHat 5.0, 5.2 and 6.0. I've never gotten the mouse
to work. I have a IBM PII 400MHz with a PS/2 mouse. I've even tried a
serial mouse with no luck.
When I installed RH6.0 the system was checked at the end of the
installation (X was started). There the mouse worked perfectly. When I
restarted the system after the installation and tried to startx, I got the
usual "Mouse could not be opened (no such device).
Can anyone help me????
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Jouni Axelsson Datalogi-programmet M�lardalens-h�gskola @
Vasagatan 38B 722 15 V�STER�S SWEDEN /|\
Tel: 021-141908 E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] / \
Mobil: 0739-867437
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.questions
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (M. Buchenrieder)
Subject: Re: How to address email without domain name?
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1999 14:36:28 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bo Berglund) writes:
>My question is simply this:
>How is the mail address supposed to be written for a user on a system
>which does not have a registered domain name?
?
If you want to send mail to a system, it must have a resolvable
IP address - and a name associated with it. A system with no
DNS entry needs a dotted IP address instead of it - (though having a
registered IP address without any DNS running doesn't make much sense).
>I have a Linux system on a fixed address on the Internet but I have
>failed sending email to users on that system using this formula:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[...]
This syntax is incorrect. If you want to address a user with the IP number
instead of a FQDN, you'll have to put the number into brackets.
username@[123.123.123.123] would do it.
Michael
--
Michael Buchenrieder * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * http://www.muc.de/~mibu
Lumber Cartel Unit #456 (TINLC) & Official Netscum
Note: If you want me to send you email, don't munge your address.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: From KDE back to Gnome???
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mike Detlefsen)
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 1999 15:10:26 GMT
Greg Dyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I switched to the KDE desktop..and now I can't get back to the Gnome
> Desktop. Any help....thanks in advance!!
>
> Greg
I had the same problem. You may have to download the "switchdesk-kde"
app. It didn't get installed on my system, so I had to download and
install it myself.
--
Sorry, but it's a bogus address in the header.
Score one for the spammers.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (George Vlahoulis)
Subject: Re: Will this ever change?
Date: 6 Sep 1999 14:25:40 GMT
On Sat, 04 Sep 1999 23:43:41 GMT, Rod Smith
wrote:
>[Posted and mailed]
>
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "Christopher R. Carlen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I have been using Linux for a few years.
>>
>> I consistently run into this situation: I make a graphic in one
>> program, and I want to use it in another program.
>>
>> In Windows, I copy and paste. Done!
>...
>> But in Linux I must export some format that is compatible with the
>> destination program
>...
>> I can also not understand fonts in Linux.
>...
>> Why can Windows do this so well, and Linux (X Window System) can't?
>
>When "it" refers to cutting and pasting between applications, the cause is
>that Windows has a much better clipboard technology for cutting and
>pasting between applications. This is part of Windows or the X Window
>system, and it's a set of tools that applications are invited to use.
>They generally do in Windows, but as the underlying tools are so crude in
>Linux, it just doesn't get used much, except for text.
>
Unfortunate but true.
>> Will it ever change?
>
>Probably, but it'll be slow. Even if some APIs came out tomorrow to
>improve these matters, and even if everybody agrees these were Good
>Things, there's still a huge installed base of programs that would need
>to be changed. Since this is **NOT** a Linux issue per se, but an X
>Window System issue, it's not something that we in the Linux community
>can tackle by ourselves. The likes of Sun Microsystems, IBM, Silicon
>Graphics, and others will all have to get together and agree on the new
>protocols. That said, there may be fixes for particular environments. I
>don't know if this is the case, but as a hypothetical for instance, KDE
>might implement some sort of inter-application clipboard, but that
>wouldn't do non-KDE programs much good.
I dont think it will be slow. As more apps are created for linux pressure
will be put on the designers of X to improve the clipboard. Linux will
propably drive this change as its/will be the most popular and strongest
unix flavor. When other companies like IBM are rushing to provide support
for linux I dont think they will take too long to think about this. If people
demand it it will be fixed. And as a matter of fact, Xfree which is what
linux uses, doesnt give a **** what IBM says anyhow. Sun and IBM are
following Linux's footsteps at the moment so I dont think they will have
a choise in that either if they'll want to be compatible with linux.
gv
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bob Tennent)
Subject: Re: xfstt and Redhat 6
Date: 6 Sep 1999 16:09:33 GMT
Reply-To: rdt(a)cs.queensu.ca
On Mon, 06 Sep 1999 15:04:12 GMT, Roch Plamondon wrote:
>
>So how can i improve readability in Netscape using xfsft There is little
>information in man pages.
>
/usr/doc/XFree86-xfs-*
http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/jec/programs/xfsft/
http://rdaneel.ddns.org/~brion/linux/TrueType-HOWTO.html
http://www.sfu.ca/~yzhang/linux/truetype/
There's also a document specifically about Netscape but I don't have the URL.
Bob T.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: C vs C++ for Open Source projects
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 06 Sep 1999 11:58:37 -0400
Bart Vanhauwaert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Niels M�ller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> : I think the largest problem with using C++ is that it is not yet a
> : stable language. If you get your code to compile with your compiler
> : and libraries, it will most likely break with anybody elses, or even
> : with the next version of your compiler. Things may improve in the next
> : few years if compilers catch up to the C++ standard, but we haven't
> : seen that yet.
>
> I can't speak for the commercial world, but it seems with the egcs/gcc
> merger, we have just seen that. Things are settling down and are getting
> less and less rough to get linking. There is now (or will be with gcc
> 3.0) one reference free compiler, which supports nearly everything in
> the language. Work on the a newer and better libstdc++ also hasn't
> halted as far as I know.
no kidding about that libstdc++ work. every minor version increment
of gcc/egcs has dropped yet another (binary) incompatible shared
libstdc++ in my /usr/lib. in order from newest to oldest, i've got
libstdc++-3-libc6.1-2-2.10.0.so
libstdc++-2-libc6.1-1-2.9.0.so
libstdc++.so.2.8.0
libstdc++.so.2.7.2.8
libg++.so.2.7.2
no doubt there's more. perusing the gcc/egcs mailing lists, i see
that the new `squangle' name mangling scheme is in the offings too.
that's at least one more incompatible shared libstdc++ coming to you
real soon now.
therefore, i would not recommend using C++ and shared libstdc++ for
any low level utilities. future breakage is a sure thing. you don't
want to have system depend on such a utility in order to boot.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (teknite)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 21:35:49 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 5 Sep 1999 19:08:33 GMT, Lizard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (teknite) wrote in <9e5uq7.sa2.ln@localhost>:
>
>>One last thing, dump vim and use pico for your
>>editor. It is much easier to use and if you need the power
>>of vim you can always learn it later.
>
>Except I've been using vi since 1993 and I *like* it. I even use it under
>Windows for some things. :) Once you're over the learning curve, it's very
>fast and powerful.
Oooops I thought you were a newbie :)
If your a vi user then by all means go for it. I was just
suggesting that someone new to Linux/slrn/editors in general
would do better to start with pico.
Teknite
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (teknite)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: General Rant from a Linux Newbie
Date: Sun, 5 Sep 1999 21:39:08 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 5 Sep 1999 21:01:17 +0200, Matthias Warkus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It was the Sun, 5 Sep 1999 13:08:33 -0500...
>...and teknite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I prefer the look and feel of Gnome combined with
>> WindowMaker to KDE.
>
>When I tried Gnome for the first time with Window Maker, I didn't like
>it at all. Then I had the idea of running it as "wmaker --no-dock".
>Whoa. I can only second your opinion.
How do I tell WindowMaker to use the --no-dock option under Gnome?
I selected it from the Gnome Control Center.
Thanks.
teknite
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Guy Macon)
Crossposted-To: comp.realtime,comp.os.qnx,comp.sys.amiga.misc
Subject: Re: Amiga, QNX, Linux and Revolution
Date: 06 Sep 1999 09:32:32 PDT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Casper) wrote:
>But still Amigas are used for all launches, and QNX is used as well!
For the benefit of the various Amiga lovers out there, I think that I
can summarize the general attitude of the QNX and Linux community
by saying that the Amiga and its OS was and still is a fine machine
with a really cool OS. To this day the Amiga does certain things
better than anything else on the today's market. You don't have
to sing the praises of Amiga to us.
On the other hand, there are good reasons why everyone got so exited
about the possibility of a new incarnation of the Amiga... The old
Amiga is uncommon - there isn't a lot of new software being written
for it. The old Amiga is no longer being upgraded as new
microprocessors and storage media are invented. It's a great
machine, but it's also an orphan. I used to be the answer man
for CTUG (Commodore Technical User's Group) in Orange County, CA.
I would do a session every meeting where I would field all questions
from the audience - I know full well how cool the Amiga is. But I
also know that there is a real need for an updated version.
When I heard about the Gateway purchase, I had a small glimmer of
hope. What was Gateway doing? Might there someday be a new Amiga?
Then I heard that at least some of the original Amiga designers
were getting involved. Now things were getting interesting...
Next came the news that the new Amiga might use the QNX microkernal
with the rest of the OS developed by those original Amiga designers.
QNX is the OS I choose when someone's like depends on a computer.
You wouldn't believe how incredibly cool the QNX microkernel scheme
is. It really is the right way to do things.
On the other hand, the rest of QNX is what I would characterize as
great for QNX's market (embedded real-time systems), but not quite
what a new Amiga would need to be a sucess. That's why I was so
happy to hear that those original Amiga designers were on board.
if they were to write something as cool as the original Amiga OS,
wrapped around the coolest microkernel ever invented and using all
of the latest hardware (USB, DVD-RAM, etc.), they just might be able
to gain enough momentum to become a real contender. ALL of the major
systems out there (Linux, Windows, and Apple) have a load of baggage
from the past - old apps and old ways of doing things that it's too
late to change. Amiga might be able to suceed by starting fresh.
Before I say what I am about to say, please understand that I am a
huge fan of Linux. I believe that the open source model will bury
all proprietary systems, and I am in openmouthed wonder at the
goodness of the latest versions of Linux. That being said, Linux is
an evolutionary product. Some parts, like the latest kernel, are
really well engineered. Other parts, especially minor parts, tend to
be a bit clunky and hard to use. Linux is also free. I don't just
mean that it's price is free, but also that Linux is free to migrate
to new hardware, add new features, etc. That's why I was not happy
to see the decision to base the new Amiga on Linux. I don't see
the point of Gateway making a Linux box and calling it a "New Amiga",
and I don't see taking a chunk of Linux and adding proprietary code
as being viable. To do so would be to leave behind what made Linux
great - Open Source. Even if the new Amiga took a chunk of Linux and
added open-source code, it would compete (and lose) against the
mainstream Linux. No, I don't think that it was wise to drop QNX for
Linux. What should happen is that the existing Linux community should
wait and see whether the new Amiga is popular, then port Linux to it
in the usual anarchistic GNU/Open Source community fashion. Linux is
really, seriously cool in it's own right, but not as a basis for the
new Amiga.
So now the fellow who made the bad decision is gone, and my hopes are
once again rising.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Please Help me!
Date: 6 Sep 1999 15:50:39 GMT
William Mariani wrote:
>
> I have a Gateway 2000 Destination with a pentium II 333mhz. It came with an
> STB Videorage II Videocard accelerated with an Apocalypse 3Dx card. The
> monitor is a Gateway Destination 36" and I need to know what settings I use
> to install it correctly. The only info I have is that the refresh rate is
> 60mhz (NTSC60). But have no other info. Please help me!
When I got my Gateway 2000 it came with a CD which had decent hardware
specs. You might try browsing around the CD's which came with your
computer.
I am happy to report that Linux is the way to go. But my GW2K is a year
and a half old at this point. So I can't help you with particulars.
Best of luck...
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
