Point 1: 
Wow ... you must be really close to Creative ... I only know of the SB Live!
128, but wasnt aware that a 256 version was out ;-) The 128 is slightly
supported, I think in the 2.2 kernels. I think a web query on keywords 'SB
Live!', 'PCI', 'sound' and 'linux' should give you some more information. 

Point 2:
In order to start binary executables, first of all permission must be set
correctly. This is however not your problem. In order to start executables,
the system must know where to find them. This can be done by specifying the
path when starting the program (either cd to the directory where the file is
located and typing './fortune', or by typing the entire directory in like
'/usr/games/fortune'. )

Now you wonder of course, "'how come I can start e.g. make by just 'make' on
the prompt? "
The answer lies in an environment variable called PATH (should sound
familiar to DOS users)
This variable is set somewhere in your startup script (~/.bashrc or
~/.profile or /etc/bashrc or /etc/profile, maybe even in all of them), and
by default installation includes directories like
/bin;/usr/bin;/usr/X11R6/bin;/usr/local/bin (type 'set' or 'echo $PATH' to
view current setting). Only binaries located in this search path can be
started by just typing their name. Since on default installations this path
does not include /usr/games or ~/ (your homedir) or ./ (the current dir),
you cannot by default start the games, even if the permissions are set or
you copy them to your homedir. 

So, in order to start the games by just typing their name, you need to add
the executable path (/usr/games) to your PATH variable in the startup
script. In order to start items from the current directory, also add ./ 
I wouldn't recommend copying the executable files to other places (like ~/
or /usr/bin), simply because this requires more diskspace. If you dont want
to modify the path, then simply create a symbolic link to the executable in
a directory in the $PATH variable by typing something like 'ln -s
/usr/games/fortune /usr/bin/fortune' 

Regards, 
Alexander van Luijpen

P.S. often $PATH includes ~/bin ... this is a good place to place any
personal executables or links to executables. The directory isnt necessarily
automatically created though. It is not good practise IMHO to copy
executables to your homedir root  (~/)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Matt Davies [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 1999 12:27 PM
> To:   Linux
> Subject:      
> 
> I have finally got X-Windows to work on my Viper 550 card - Thanks to all
> those that helped.  But I still have two major problems to cope with,
> after
> which my migration from Win98 to Linux will finally start!.
> 
> 1.  I have a Soundblaster Live! 256 Value card in my machine.  I try
> recompiling the Kernel which failed but even the current source doesn't
> seem
> to have a driver for this card.  Is there a driver module for this card
> around on the internet and how do I go about installing it.  I have looked
> at the HOWTOs and I am getting lost as my foundation knowledge of Linux is
> still small but growing each day!  Any help would be greatly apreciated.
> 
> 2.  For some reason none of the executables in the /usr/games (or
> whereever
> it is, these are console-based games) seem to want to execute.  The
> directory that it is in "seems" to have the right permissions and the
> files
> themselves.  Certainly on a ls -F I get asterisks indicating they are
> executable.  They exist in the directory but bash returns with 'command
> not
> found'.  I have tried copying the files to the root home directory and
> they
> will still not execute even though they belong to root and I am logged in
> as
> root.  I have noticed this behaviour with scripts that I have written to
> mount and remount my cd-rom (I haven't forgotten to use chmod to make them
> executable neither).  Please help me run 'fortune' and other programs like
> this.
> 
> Thanks for listening and look forward to any solutions,
> 
> Best regards,
> Matt.
> 
  • Re: Alexander . vanLuijpen
    • Re: Matt Davies
      • Re: Anonymous

Reply via email to