Linux-Misc Digest #80, Volume #26 Thu, 19 Oct 00 12:13:01 EDT
Contents:
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Harry Lewis)
Re: what files should go into /usr/libexec (Giacomo Catenazzi)
Re: truncated sounds ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Help: Can Dial in to PPP server, can't get out of it ("Merritt Krakowitzer")
How to control ide bus with linux? ("NTUST News")
Re: What device is LS120 drive??? (E J)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Grant Edwards)
Re: Disabling directory browsing/listings in Apache ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: How to control ide bus with linux? (Tony Lawrence)
Re: What is a good graphical mail client? (NAVARRO LOPEZ, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs?=
Manuel)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Harry Lewis)
Re: No more PTY's for screen 3.09.08 (Salim Qadri)
Determinig functions build in Kernel ("J.Smith")
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Joseph Dalton)
Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux? (Andrew J. Perrin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Harry Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 15:09:10 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Joseph Dalton wrote:
>
> Harry Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> ...
> >
> > I agree with what you say, but my point is that, these days, using a
> > computer for word processing is all about content management. A good
> > word processor will provide you with better facilities for this than a
> > program that evolved from a typesetting tool.
> >
> > Harry
>
> I disagree. a so-called "good" word processor may give that appearance
> but the reality can be vastly different. Let me quote Neal Stephenson
> from "In the Beginning was the Command Line":
>
> <quote>
> Sometime in the mid-1980's I attempted to open one of my old,
> circa-1985 Word documents using the version of Word then current: 6.0
> It didn't work. Word 6.0 did not recognize a document created by an
> earlier version of itself. By opening it as a text file, I was able to
> recover the sequences of letters that made up the text of the
> document. My words were still there. But the formatting had been run
> through a log chipper--the words I'd written were interrupted by
> spates of empty rectangular boxes and gibberish.
>
> Now, in the context of a business (the chief market for Word) this
> sort of thing is only an annoyance--one of the routine hassles that go
> along with using computers. It's easy to buy little file converter
> programs that will take care of this problem. But if you are a writer
> whose career is words, whose professional identity is a corpus of
> written documents, this kind of thing is extremely disquieting.
> ...
> </quote>
>
> Most companies producing word processors do not have the pristine
> condition of your content at heart, but rather continual churn to
> the next version of the software. As can be seen from the above
> quote this can really play hell with your content management.
>
> Furthermore, features of LaTeX, or even SGML+LaTeX, can offer
> features, in combination with other tools (CVS, some DB) that
> can manage content as well, or even better than most word
> processors.
What you say is entirely true - looking at a Word file, your document
looks like gibberish, not content in its raw form. However, this isn't
evidence that word processors aren't about content - it's evidence of
the fact that word processors use proprietary formats to tie you into
the product. Once inside the system, in my opinion, you're looking at
content (which you can export in a number of formats, inlcuding
unformatted text).
This is not to say that I wouldn't find it easier to extract content
from the source file of a tool like LaTeX than from Word file - it's
just that working with source files definitely isn't what it's all about
- it working with content using the tool that matters!
However, I'm not going to try and convert people to word processing - if
LaTeX works for you, use it!
Harry
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:17:24 +0200
From: Giacomo Catenazzi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: what files should go into /usr/libexec
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> What files should go into /usr/libexec? Thanks in advance for any info!
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
libexec is the way of GNU to put executable file that should be called
only
by other program.
The true standard: http://www.pathname.com/fhs/ don't use this
directory.
giacomo
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: truncated sounds
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:24:03 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 13:49:47 +0200, Christian Wenz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>i work with the kernel 2.2.16 and i use gnome and enlightment.
>my soundcard is a sb 64
>i like to know why the event-sounds under enlightment are truncated.
>the "welcome to enlightment"-sound e.x. at the beginning of a session
>is truncated so o here "welco".
>what is the problem ? has anybody the same experience ??
I have a similar problem in kde when I play sounds in a self-written
program. The sound is interrupted as soon as a popup window shows up at the
same time when the sound is played. If the popup is disabled, the sound
plays fine. Which XFree version do you have ? I have 4.01. Would be
interesting to know if also in your case some window pops up at the same
time...at the beginning of a session this is most likely. My kde system
sound is ok, btw.
--
Eggert Ehmke
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Merritt Krakowitzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Help: Can Dial in to PPP server, can't get out of it
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:26:41 +0200
you prolly need to enable ip forwarding, wish i could remember how :)
but i recon thats yer prob, if yer dialup server isnt configgered to forward
packets it wont. i think its disabled for rfc compliance. if u cant figure
out how letme know ill take a jog up the server room :)
Merritt Krakowitzer
Erik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hello-
> I'm setting up a RH6.1 "dialin server" using mgetty and pppd. I can dial
> in with Windows clients and get things going. However, I am unable to
> get out of the server to any other machine on the server's network. I
> cannot resolve host names nor get out to any known IPs. The dialin
> server runs apache and the client box can connect to that web using the
> server's IP (but not hostname.)
>
> /etc/ppp/options has the following line:
>
> ms-dns xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
>
> This network is a frame relay and has a specific gateway at each segment
> (between me and the dns') but I cannot see what needs doing.
>
> Any ideas of what to try?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Erik
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (please email)
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: "NTUST News" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.networking,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: How to control ide bus with linux?
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 22:23:57 +0800
hello all
I wanna control one chip with linux.
This chip supports 8 bit IDE bus
So....If I wanna program in linux.
How can I do that?
Please give me some solutions .....thanks....
------------------------------
From: E J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What device is LS120 drive???
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 07:27:52 -0700
Your windows data is probably not on partition 1, it is probably on another
partition.
Use fdisk to find out where your windows partition is.
$ su -
password: <secret>
# fdisk /dev/hdd
Command (m for help): p
Disk /dev/hdd: 255 heads, 63 sectors, 4982 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 bytes
Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System
/dev/hdd1 32 2481 19679625 c Win95 FAT32
(LBA) <<<<< This windows partition is on hdd1
/dev/hdd2 4 31 224910 82 Linux swap
/dev/hdd3 * 1 3 24066 83 Linux
/dev/hdd4 2482 4981 20081250 83 Linux
Partition table entries are not in disk order
Command (m for help):
Bo Berglund wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:18:25 -0700, E J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> .. snip...
> >It depends what partition your data is located, if you have a windows
> >LS120 floppy
> >$ su -
> >password: <secret>
> ># mount /dev/hdb1 /mnt/floppy -t vfat # if you have the first partition
> >containing windows data
> >
>
> Thanks, but...
>
> With an ordinary MSDOS floppy in the drive I tried:
> mount /dev/hdd1 /mnt/floppy -t vfat and also
> mount /dev/hdd1 /mnt/floppy -t msdos
>
> (The LS120 sits on the secondary IDE port as the slave, there is no
> master in that port)
>
> But all that happens is that I hear clicking sounds from the drive for
> a while and then there is an error message on the screen saying that
> something is wrong with the command line or that there are too many
> file systems or something similar.
>
> Still no possibility to read anything off the floppy....
>
> Bo Berglund
> Software developer in Sweden
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> PGP: My public key is available at the following locations:
> Idap://certserver.pgp.com
> http://pgpkeys.mit.edu:11371
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Grant Edwards)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 14:48:54 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Harry Lewis wrote:
>Maybe it's the way I use Word (oops - did I just admit to using Word?),
>as I start with an outline, then proceed in "document view" without any
>formatting (other than the auto formats provided by Word (oops - did I
>just admit to using Word "features"?)), then apply the formatting when I
>actually need the text in output, but - to me - Word is very good at
>separating content from its ultimate rendition (oops - did I just admit
>to liking Word).
I've never seen anybody else use Word like that.
All the people I've worked with spend 90% of their time from
the very beginning futzing with fonts and margins and
backgrounds and colors and whatnot rather than actually
producing content. It would almost be excusable if they ended
up with something nice looking but vacuous. But the don't.
They end up with something ugly and vacuous.
With LaTeX, at least the output looks nice, even if it's drivel.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! RELAX!!... This
at is gonna be a HEALING
visi.com EXPERIENCE!! Besides,
I work for DING DONGS!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Disabling directory browsing/listings in Apache
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 14:36:04 GMT
Hi Richard
Could you please explain what I have to do, If I wan't Internet users
to browse specified folders.
It is the reverse thing that you asked for here, so I hope you can help
me out.
Thanks in advance.
Greetings.
Peter
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Richard R. Kaufman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am interested in disabling people who visit my website from
browsing my
> directories by going to http://my.server.com/myuser/folder and being
able
> to view the contents of the folder if there is no default document in
it.
> Can someone tell me what modification I have to make to apache's
> configuration to disable this? Thanks in advance for any help.
>
> Richard R. Kaufman
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> --
> Posted via CNET Help.com
> http://www.help.com/
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Tony Lawrence <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.networking,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: How to control ide bus with linux?
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 10:59:39 -0400
NTUST News wrote:
>
> hello all
>
> I wanna control one chip with linux.
> This chip supports 8 bit IDE bus
> So....If I wanna program in linux.
> How can I do that?
> Please give me some solutions .....thanks....
Linux Device Drivers, by Alessandro Rubin
http://www.aplawrence.com/Books/lindd.shtml
And then ask more specific questions..
--
Tony Lawrence ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
SCO/Linux articles, help, book reviews, tests,
job listings and more : http://www.pcunix.com
------------------------------
From: NAVARRO LOPEZ, =?iso-8859-1?Q?Jes=FAs?= Manuel
Subject: Re: What is a good graphical mail client?
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:56:50 +0200
Hi, Hugh:
Hugh Lawson wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, NAVARRO LOPEZ, Jes�s
> Manuel wrote:
>
> >Johan Kullstam wrote:
>
> >> the problem with unix is that often one program doesn't do all these
> >> things (well netscape can but doesn't have to).
> >>
> >
> >That's simply untrue. The splitting among MUAs and MTAs has nothing to
> >do with unices but with a reasonable way to manage electronic mail.
> >1/ it's perfectly possible to have a MTA/MUA single program (ie. you can
> >just telnet 25 into sendmail).
>
> I don't understand much about the technical issues being discussed,
> whether netscape is or is not a mta, and so on.
>
> But in my setup, a single user box, netscape can handle email, whatever
No, it can't. Why do you think you *must* include that funny 'Outgoing
(SMTP) Mail *SERVER*' option, if Netscape were able to be its own
server????
Why do you think you *must* include that funny 'Incoming Mail *SERVERS*'
(either POP or IMAP) option, if Netscape were able to be its own
server????
> acronym it belongs under, with a little configuration that you can get
> from your isp. To make sendmail and other such programs work, if the
> out-of-the-box configuration doesn't suit you, you have to do some serious
> study.
Obviously: usually involves more knowlegde and configuration problems to
be a *server* than a *client*, no matter if you are speaking informatics
or the milk bussiness.
>
> Perhaps there are some, but I haven't seen an email program like pine that
> also just takes care of the mail without sendmail or fetchmail. That's
> the kind of program I thought the OP was looking for. Something that
> specialized in email, but didn't need sendmail/fetchmail for most
> single-user box situations.
>
Pine? More on the same: to my knowledge pine is just as unable to
deliver your mail to its destination as Netscape is (though it can
directly manipulate your mbox file).
NOTE: crossposting cutted down.
--
SALUD,
Jes�s
***
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
------------------------------
From: Harry Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 16:20:38 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Grant Edwards wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Harry Lewis wrote:
>
> >Maybe it's the way I use Word (oops - did I just admit to using Word?),
> >as I start with an outline, then proceed in "document view" without any
> >formatting (other than the auto formats provided by Word (oops - did I
> >just admit to using Word "features"?)), then apply the formatting when I
> >actually need the text in output, but - to me - Word is very good at
> >separating content from its ultimate rendition (oops - did I just admit
> >to liking Word).
>
> I've never seen anybody else use Word like that.
>
> All the people I've worked with spend 90% of their time from
> the very beginning futzing with fonts and margins and
> backgrounds and colors and whatnot rather than actually
> producing content. It would almost be excusable if they ended
> up with something nice looking but vacuous. But the don't.
> They end up with something ugly and vacuous.
>
> With LaTeX, at least the output looks nice, even if it's drivel.
Well, part of my job is professional writing, so I guess that's the
primary driver not only for the tools I choose but also for how I use
them. That being said, I use Word just for editing - for final layout,
everything goes into PageMaker (on the Mac), which is much more suited
to DTP than Word.
Harry
------------------------------
From: Salim Qadri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: No more PTY's for screen 3.09.08
Date: 19 Oct 2000 11:18:06 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Villy Kruse) writes:
> On 11 Oct 2000 12:54:00 -0400, Salim Qadri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >I have Turbolinux6 system based on their 2.2.13-12 and now running my
> >own 2.2.17 kernel. The 2.2.17 kernel has 256 pty support.
> >
> >Screen used to work right out of the box, but now i have somehow
> >fucked it up so that it can't run and gives an error saying "No more
> >PTY's". I think i screwed things up when I tried installing a new
> >version of screen from the sources. The README asks me to put termcap
> >and terminfo files in their proper locations, but I'm not quite sure
> >what they are. Could someone please point me to some info.
>
> Sure you compiled it for using the new pts interface rather than the
> old pty/tty interface -- or the other way around.
Welp... I checked every thing in the screen directory and did not find
anything relating to an old or new pty interface. regardless, this
still does not work, and I know of someone else who has the same
problem.
Thanks again
salim
------------------------------
From: "J.Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,alt.os.linux.mandrake,alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Determinig functions build in Kernel
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 17:22:46 +0200
Hi.
When troubleshooting some issues with linux, it often seems like a good idea
to verify that the functionality one is looking for, has indeed been
compiled, either directly into the kernel or as an module. For example, the
solution to a sound or network problems can sometimes be as simple as
determining that there is no sound support compiled into the kernel, or that
a module for a specific card has not been built.
I was wondering if it is possible to determine and verify which functions
have been built into the kernel, and which functions have been built as
modules? Talking about a 2.2.16 kernel here. I thought that you might be
able to get this info from /proc on a running kernel, or with some other
clever debugging tools on a non-running kernel, but unfortunatly I have no
idea how to accomplish this.
If anyone can give me some insight on this matter, that would be greatly
appreciated.
------------------------------
From: Joseph Dalton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: 19 Oct 2000 11:45:44 -0400
Harry Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
...
>
> What you say is entirely true - looking at a Word file, your document
> looks like gibberish, not content in its raw form. However, this isn't
> evidence that word processors aren't about content - it's evidence of
> the fact that word processors use proprietary formats to tie you into
> the product. Once inside the system, in my opinion, you're looking at
> content (which you can export in a number of formats, inlcuding
> unformatted text).
>
As long as your content is disposable I guess.
> This is not to say that I wouldn't find it easier to extract content
> from the source file of a tool like LaTeX than from Word file - it's
> just that working with source files definitely isn't what it's all about
> - it working with content using the tool that matters!
>
LaTeX, as a source file, is far more content oriented than you allude
to here, better so than Word.
> However, I'm not going to try and convert people to word processing - if
> LaTeX works for you, use it!
>
There are problems with many document generation tools, even to some
extent LaTeX (making tables, and including graphics can be painful to
learn, not so bad once you know it). It is just that Word is much more
trouble than it is worth. Sure it gives a nice illusion of ease of
use, but makes you pay with random lost or trashed documents, and
forcing you to deal with nit-picky details of fonts and such. It
doesn't really produce the best output either. LaTeX typically allows
you to concentrate on your content without having to worry about all
those nit-picky details.
The other big problem with Word is that it tries as hard as it can, as
you noted, to lock you and everyone else for that matter in to its
proprietary format. I really don't care if you use Word. But I don't
want to be forced to use it if I don't want to. Unfortunately this can
be difficult to avoid what with MS being a monopoly and all.
> Harry
--
-- Joe Dalton
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Andrew J. Perrin)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Is there a MS Word (or substitute) for Linux?
Date: 19 Oct 2000 11:25:15 -0400
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sean Clarke) writes:
>
> Which journal doesn't accept Latex files then?
>
> Sean
Unfortunately most of the social science journals don't.
--
======================================================================
Andrew J Perrin - Ph.D. Candidate, UC Berkeley, Dept. of Sociology
Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA - http://demog.berkeley.edu/~aperrin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - [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
******************************
