Re: OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[Liam O'Toole]

On 2017-04-01, Lisi Reisz  wrote:
> On Saturday 01 April 2017 18:11:12 Liam O'Toole wrote:
>> On 2017-03-31, Lisi Reisz  wrote:
>>
>> (...)
>>
>> > We are part of the same sovereign state, but 4 nations.
>>
>> When you consider some of the Irish, yes. Most Irish people live in a
>> different sovereign state.
>
> Agreed!!!  But the United Kingdom has 4 nations in it.  It is one Sovereign 
> State (for a little while longer anyway) but 4 nations.  The fact that one of 
> those nations has temporarily been split in two by history is a separate 
> issue. You surely wouldn't dispute that it is a discrete nation?
>
> Lisi

No, not at all. (In fact, I see the UK as consisting of three nations
plus a bit of someone else's nation.) I wanted to dispel the frequently
encountered notion that the UK extends to all of Britain and Ireland.
Your original statement above, unqualified, could be seen to perpetuate
that misconception.

-- 

Liam

Re: OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[Lisi Reisz]

On Saturday 01 April 2017 18:11:12 Liam O'Toole wrote:
> On 2017-03-31, Lisi Reisz  wrote:
>
> (...)
>
> > We are part of the same sovereign state, but 4 nations.
>
> When you consider some of the Irish, yes. Most Irish people live in a
> different sovereign state.

Agreed!!!  But the United Kingdom has 4 nations in it.  It is one Sovereign 
State (for a little while longer anyway) but 4 nations.  The fact that one of 
those nations has temporarily been split in two by history is a separate 
issue. You surely wouldn't dispute that it is a discrete nation?

Lisi

Re: OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[Liam O'Toole]

On 2017-03-31, Lisi Reisz  wrote:

(...)

> We are part of the same sovereign state, but 4 nations.

When you consider some of the Irish, yes. Most Irish people live in a
different sovereign state.

-- 

Liam

Re: OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[Curt]

On 2017-03-31, Greg Wooledge  wrote:
>
> For whatever it's worth, here in Ohio, "next Thursday" would mean the
> Thursday that occurs in the next calendar week.  "This Thursday" means
> the Thursday that occurs (or occurred) in the current calendar week,
> though you'd need to use the past tense when saying it today, or people
> would get very confused.

Someone once taught me a song about Ohio. It went something like this:

Oh why oh why oh why oh,
Did I ever leave Ohio.

Never forgot that song.

> If you want to be clear, just include the numeric date.  Your meeting
> would be "Thursday, April 6th".

2018. 

Trouble with you people is you don't get out on some of the other days
of the week.

> English is hilarious.
>
>


-- 
"It might be a vision--of a shell, of a wheelbarrow, of a fairy kingdom on the
far side of the hedge; or it might be the glory of speed; no one knew." --Mrs.
Ramsay, speculating on why her little daughter might be dashing about, in "To
the Lighthouse," by Virginia Woolf.

Re: OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[Lisi Reisz]

On Friday 31 March 2017 15:15:46 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, March 31, 2017 09:34:26 AM Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Friday 31 March 2017 14:04:03 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > To specify the Thursday before the last Thursday, use something like:
> > > "the Thursday before last Thursday".
> > >
> > > To specify the Thursday after the coming Thursday, use something like:
> > > "the Thursday after next Thursday".
> >
> > Great - all fine in theory.  But you try announcing a meeting that way!!!
> > Here in England we debate it, meaning that I and my husband disagree. 
> > When I say "next Thursday", I mean the Thursday next week.  When he says
> > next Thursday he means the next Thursday to arrive, i.e. this Thursday. 
> > We are both English, but I Cockney-born and he Yorkshire.
>
> And you're still married? ;-)
>
> > And let us clear up another misunderstanding while we are at it.  The
> > other side of the pond you appear to be under a delusion that there is
> > such a thing as British anything, including English.  Try telling that to
> > the Welsh, the Irish and the Scots!
>
> Similar to the situation on this side of the pond, for example north and
> south, or New England, California, Pennsylvania Dutch ("throw your father
> down the stairs his hat" ;-),  and other parts of the US (or Canada).

Not quite.  California and New England are, so far, part of the same nation.  
We are part of the same sovereign state, but 4 nations.

Lisi

Re: OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[Eike Lantzsch]

On Friday, 31 March 2017 10:18:24 -04 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Friday, March 31, 2017 09:45:59 AM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 02:34:26PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > > Great - all fine in theory.  But you try announcing a meeting that
> > > way!!!
> > > Here in England we debate it, meaning that I and my husband disagree.
> > > When I say "next Thursday", I mean the Thursday next week.  When he says
> > > next Thursday he means the next Thursday to arrive, i.e. this Thursday.
> > > We are both English, but I Cockney-born and he Yorkshire.
> > 
> > For whatever it's worth, here in Ohio, "next Thursday" would mean the
> > Thursday that occurs in the next calendar week.  "This Thursday" means
> > the Thursday that occurs (or occurred) in the current calendar week,
> > though you'd need to use the past tense when saying it today, or people
> > would get very confused.
> 
> Interesting!  (I guess I've run into that meaning without really realizing
> it...)
> 
> > If you want to be clear, just include the numeric date.  Your meeting
> > would be "Thursday, April 6th".
> > 
> > English is hilarious.
> 
> +10

Ambiguity often is good and can be used to postpone fruitless discussions:
Coworker: "When will this be ready?"
Me: "On Thursday."
on closest Thursday ->
Coworker: "Hey, is XX ready?"
Me: "No."
Coworker: "You said it will be ready on Thursday."
Me: "Did I indicate which Thursday?"
Coworker: "!!" now starting fruitless discussion

Re: OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[rhkramer]

On Friday, March 31, 2017 09:45:59 AM Greg Wooledge wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 02:34:26PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > Great - all fine in theory.  But you try announcing a meeting that way!!!
> > Here in England we debate it, meaning that I and my husband disagree. 
> > When I say "next Thursday", I mean the Thursday next week.  When he says
> > next Thursday he means the next Thursday to arrive, i.e. this Thursday. 
> > We are both English, but I Cockney-born and he Yorkshire.
> 
> For whatever it's worth, here in Ohio, "next Thursday" would mean the
> Thursday that occurs in the next calendar week.  "This Thursday" means
> the Thursday that occurs (or occurred) in the current calendar week,
> though you'd need to use the past tense when saying it today, or people
> would get very confused.

Interesting!  (I guess I've run into that meaning without really realizing 
it...)

> If you want to be clear, just include the numeric date.  Your meeting
> would be "Thursday, April 6th".
> 
> English is hilarious.

+10

Re: OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[rhkramer]

On Friday, March 31, 2017 09:34:26 AM Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Friday 31 March 2017 14:04:03 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > To specify the Thursday before the last Thursday, use something like:
> > "the Thursday before last Thursday".
> > 
> > To specify the Thursday after the coming Thursday, use something like:
> > "the Thursday after next Thursday".
> 
> Great - all fine in theory.  But you try announcing a meeting that way!!!
> Here in England we debate it, meaning that I and my husband disagree.  When
> I say "next Thursday", I mean the Thursday next week.  When he says next
> Thursday he means the next Thursday to arrive, i.e. this Thursday.  We are
> both English, but I Cockney-born and he Yorkshire.

And you're still married? ;-)

> 
> And let us clear up another misunderstanding while we are at it.  The other
> side of the pond you appear to be under a delusion that there is such a
> thing as British anything, including English.  Try telling that to the
> Welsh, the Irish and the Scots!

Similar to the situation on this side of the pond, for example north and 
south, or New England, California, Pennsylvania Dutch ("throw your father down 
the stairs his hat" ;-),  and other parts of the US (or Canada).

Re: OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[Greg Wooledge]

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 02:34:26PM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote:
> Great - all fine in theory.  But you try announcing a meeting that way!!!  
> Here in England we debate it, meaning that I and my husband disagree.  When I 
> say "next Thursday", I mean the Thursday next week.  When he says next 
> Thursday he means the next Thursday to arrive, i.e. this Thursday.  We are 
> both English, but I Cockney-born and he Yorkshire.

For whatever it's worth, here in Ohio, "next Thursday" would mean the
Thursday that occurs in the next calendar week.  "This Thursday" means
the Thursday that occurs (or occurred) in the current calendar week,
though you'd need to use the past tense when saying it today, or people
would get very confused.

If you want to be clear, just include the numeric date.  Your meeting
would be "Thursday, April 6th".

English is hilarious.

Re: OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[Lisi Reisz]

On Friday 31 March 2017 14:04:03 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> To specify the Thursday before the last Thursday, use something like: "the
> Thursday before last Thursday".
>
> To specify the Thursday after the coming Thursday, use something like: "the
> Thursday after next Thursday".

Great - all fine in theory.  But you try announcing a meeting that way!!!  
Here in England we debate it, meaning that I and my husband disagree.  When I 
say "next Thursday", I mean the Thursday next week.  When he says next 
Thursday he means the next Thursday to arrive, i.e. this Thursday.  We are 
both English, but I Cockney-born and he Yorkshire.

And let us clear up another misunderstanding while we are at it.  The other 
side of the pond you appear to be under a delusion that there is such a thing 
as British anything, including English.  Try telling that to the Welsh, the 
Irish and the Scots! 

Lisi

OT: speaking of days (weeks, months, years, etc.) (was: Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt)

[rhkramer]

On Friday, March 31, 2017 06:30:25 AM Terence wrote:
> There is no ambiguity if (as I have always understood) "Thursday" means
> "this (or the coming) Thursday" and "next Thursday" or "Thursday next"
> means "a week on Thursday".
> 
> And having lived in Yorkshire for two very happy years, I would agree that
> York is above London in so many ways...

To me, all that has been discussed is (potentially) confusing and ambiguous.

To me, I prefer the following--ohh, most of the examples assume that the 
current day is not Thursday (but maybe that makes no difference):

Thursday can refer either to the coming Thursday or the previous Thursday 
based on the context, for example:

On Thursday, we played baseball.  (obvious (to me) that was the (just) 
previous Thursday)

The paper is due on Thursday.  (obvious (to me) that is the (just) coming 
Thursday)

Last Thursday, we played baseball.  (clear to me, but the "last" is redundant 
and may be ambiguous to some--might some mean the Thursday before the most 
recent??)

The paper is due next Thursday.   (clear to me, but the "next" is redundant 
and is ambiguous to some--some seem to mean the Thursday after the coming / 
really next Thursday)

The paper is due Thursday next.  (clear to me, but the "next" is redundant and 
is ambiguous to some--some seem to mean the Thursday after the coming / really 
next Thursday--it might be a Briticism (to coin or mangle a word))

To specify the Thursday before the last Thursday, use something like: "the 
Thursday before last Thursday".

To specify the Thursday after the coming Thursday, use something like: "the 
Thursday after next Thursday".

Use similar constructs for other days, weeks, months, years, millennia, 
minutes, hours, etc., or better, specify a date, year, time, or similar.

I'm not aware of whether the grammar lords have established a clear preferred 
usage pattern--if they have, I'm sure it differs on the two sides of the 
Atlantic.

(Maybe this is my subconcious bid to become a grammar lord??  Uuh, I think 
I'll shut up now, I'd hate to be tagged with that label.)

Randy Kramer







 

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Terence]

There is no ambiguity if (as I have always understood) "Thursday" means
"this (or the coming) Thursday" and "next Thursday" or "Thursday next"
means "a week on Thursday".

And having lived in Yorkshire for two very happy years, I would agree that
York is above London in so many ways...

Terence

On 31 March 2017 at 08:43, Jonathan Dowland  wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:56:25PM +0100, Terence wrote:
> > Lisi asks "And is London "up" or "down"from York?"
> >
> > London is "up". "Up trains" were those travelling to London terminii,
> "Down
> > trains" departed from London terminii to other parts of the rail network.
>
> That's an interesting, if historical, explanation. These days York is
> definitely
> up from London.
>
> (Writing from Newcastle, up from London and York.)
>
> --
> ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
> ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
> ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
> ⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.
>

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Jonathan Dowland]

On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 08:56:25PM +0100, Terence wrote:
> Lisi asks "And is London "up" or "down"from York?"
> 
> London is "up". "Up trains" were those travelling to London terminii, "Down
> trains" departed from London terminii to other parts of the rail network.

That's an interesting, if historical, explanation. These days York is definitely
up from London.

(Writing from Newcastle, up from London and York.)

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ 
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ Jonathan Dowland
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ https://jmtd.net
⠈⠳⣄ Please do not CC me, I am subscribed to the list.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Catherine Gramze]

> On Mar 30, 2017, at 6:10 PM, Lisi Reisz  wrote:
> 
>> On Thursday 30 March 2017 21:22:57 Catherine Gramze wrote:
>> This reminds me of the time a professor gave a coding assignment on
>> Tuesday, due "next Thursday." To most of the class that meant in 2 days,
>> rather than next week. Hilarity ensued. But I think the Brits have it
>> right, with "Thursday" meaning in two days, and "Thursday next" meaning
>> next week. (I may be imagining this difference in clarity, though.)
> 
> All the Brits I know say "next Thursday" with exactly the ambiguity mentioned.
> 
> Cue every Brit who disagrees, from among the very large number of Brits whom 
> I 
> do not know!!
> 
Cruel of you to disabuse me of my happy illusion of Brit linguistic 
superiority. Next, you'll be telling me it's spelled aluminium

Cathy

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Lisi Reisz]

On Thursday 30 March 2017 21:22:57 Catherine Gramze wrote:
> This reminds me of the time a professor gave a coding assignment on
> Tuesday, due "next Thursday." To most of the class that meant in 2 days,
> rather than next week. Hilarity ensued. But I think the Brits have it
> right, with "Thursday" meaning in two days, and "Thursday next" meaning
> next week. (I may be imagining this difference in clarity, though.)

All the Brits I know say "next Thursday" with exactly the ambiguity mentioned.

Cue every Brit who disagrees, from among the very large number of Brits whom I 
do not know!!

Lisi

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Catherine Gramze]

> On Mar 30, 2017, at 3:56 PM, Terence  wrote:
> 
> Lisi asks "And is London "up" or "down"from York?"
> 
> London is "up". "Up trains" were those travelling to London terminii, "Down 
> trains" departed from London terminii to other parts of the rail network.

I have run across people to whom "uptown" refers to the central area of only a 
very large city, and "downtown" is everyplace else - and vice versa.
> 
> On the other hand, if you "Take The 'A' Train" Sugar Hill is "up in Harlem".

Manhattan is a special well-defined case where going "up" or "down" refers to 
the street numbers. 109th St. is "up" from 54th St. The numbers go from the 
southwest tip of the island northeast, and they are all numbered streets. Very 
handy.
> 
> As they say in "Private Eye", I don't get out much..

This reminds me of the time a professor gave a coding assignment on Tuesday, 
due "next Thursday." To most of the class that meant in 2 days, rather than 
next week. Hilarity ensued. But I think the Brits have it right, with 
"Thursday" meaning in two days, and "Thursday next" meaning next week. (I may 
be imagining this difference in clarity, though.)

Cathy

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Terence]

Lisi asks "And is London "up" or "down"from York?"

London is "up". "Up trains" were those travelling to London terminii, "Down
trains" departed from London terminii to other parts of the rail network.

On the other hand, if you "Take The 'A' Train" Sugar Hill is "up in Harlem".

As they say in "Private Eye", I don't get out much...

Terence

On 30 March 2017 at 20:28, John Hasler  wrote:

> Eike Lantzsch writes:
> > the Dutch in New Netherland were called "Jan Kees".  New Netherland
> > became mostly New York and the locals became "Yankees". So somebody
> > from South Carolina may feel that he himself must not be considered to
> > be a "Yankee".  Whether the nickname for the Dutch was just friendly
> > banter or derogative, I don't know.
>
> It gets more complicated yet.  Look up the song "Yankee Doodle".
> --
> John Hasler
> jhas...@newsguy.com
> Elmwood, WI USA
>
>

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[John Hasler]

Eike Lantzsch writes:
> the Dutch in New Netherland were called "Jan Kees".  New Netherland
> became mostly New York and the locals became "Yankees". So somebody
> from South Carolina may feel that he himself must not be considered to
> be a "Yankee".  Whether the nickname for the Dutch was just friendly
> banter or derogative, I don't know.

It gets more complicated yet.  Look up the song "Yankee Doodle".
-- 
John Hasler 
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Richard Owlett]

On 03/30/2017 01:15 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote:

On Thursday 30 March 2017 18:43:00 kAt wrote:

In any case, looking "down" on people due to their origin


One of the geographical meanings of "down" in English English is "South" .

"South (as south is at the bottom of typical maps).
I went down to Miami for a conference."
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/down

If one takes Yankee to mean New Yorker, then surely North Carolina is down??

We have country bumpkins in the Home Counties.  And is London "up" or "down"
from York?

Lisi


"Yankee" is one of those words that means what the speaker wishes it to 
mean. That meaning is strongly influenced by where the speaker was born.


There's an old joke along the lines of:
  If from Florida, it's someone from north of the Mason-Dixon line.
  If from north of Mason-Dixon line, it's someone from New England.
  If from New England, it's someone from Maine.
  If from Maine, it's someone who puts ketchup on his eggs.

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Eike Lantzsch]

On Wednesday, 29 March 2017 22:29:59 -04 Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Wednesday 29 March 2017 20:46:00 kAt wrote:
> > What do you mean down?  You arrogant yankee?
> 
> Don't Yankees come from the United States??  Or is Curt an expat??
> 
> Lisi

Hi y'all,
Oh - OK here is OT:
the Dutch in New Netherland were called "Jan Kees".  New Netherland became 
mostly New York and the locals became "Yankees". So somebody from South 
Carolina may feel that he himself must not be considered to be a "Yankee".
Whether the nickname for the Dutch was just friendly banter or derogative, I 
don't know. Hard to say anyway because names, which once were meant to be 
friendly or neutral got a derogative meaning by and by.
"Down" if referring to a city, land or continent, mostly is used in view of 
the map, which is commonly oriented with north up and south down. So I'm 
living "down" here in South America while you are living "up" there on the 
northern hemisphere.
People may be "up" there on the stage, but they are judged by the critics 
"down" there in the auditorium or are the critics always "up" there in the 
boxes?
I had to look up "bumpkin" however. No, that is not polite ... So why did 
"down" trigger the reply and not the mention of the unexperienced resident of 
the rural parts of the southeastern parts of the country, which must not be 
named?
I recommend a thicker hide to not be offended by everybody and everything.
Or was it just hyperbole?
Eike

 -- 
Eike Lantzsch ZP6CGE
Eliminate batteries - they are so polarized.

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Catherine Gramze]

> On Mar 29, 2017, at 5:29 PM, Lisi Reisz  wrote:
> 
> Don't Yankees come from the United States??  Or is Curt an expat??
> 
The term Yankee refers specifically to a person from the northern, rather than 
southern, part of the USA, when used by a US native, usually one from the 
south. It is not a compliment. A damn Yankee is a Yankee who intends to live 
indefinitely in the south.

It has been used by people from other countries to refer to a person from the 
USA, no matter their location. A Yankee as opposed to a Kiwi, or a Brit, or an 
Aussie.

No offense toward any group of people is intended in this post.
Cathy

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Lisi Reisz]

On Thursday 30 March 2017 18:43:00 kAt wrote:
> In any case, looking "down" on people due to their origin

One of the geographical meanings of "down" in English English is "South" .

"South (as south is at the bottom of typical maps).
I went down to Miami for a conference."
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/down

If one takes Yankee to mean New Yorker, then surely North Carolina is down??

We have country bumpkins in the Home Counties.  And is London "up" or "down" 
from York?

Lisi

‎

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[kAt]

Lisi Reisz:
> On Wednesday 29 March 2017 20:46:00 kAt wrote:
>> What do you mean down?  You arrogant yankee?
> 
> Don't Yankees come from the United States??  Or is Curt an expat??

In any case, looking "down" on people due to their origin (and other
characteristics) is not very social - and once you stick your antisocial
(elitist) head up you must be willing to get some response, or attention.

> Lisi

kAt

Re: Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[Lisi Reisz]

On Wednesday 29 March 2017 20:46:00 kAt wrote:
> What do you mean down?  You arrogant yankee?

Don't Yankees come from the United States??  Or is Curt an expat??

Lisi

Re:Movie 'n Book recommendations by Curt

[kAt]

Curt:
> On 2017-03-28, kAt  wrote:
> 
>> All I can say is that I feel honored that some useful code was produced
>> with my problem statement as an inspiration.
> 
> That's like some befuddled bumpkin down in North Carolina saying he's
> proud to find a portrait of himself in one of Thomas Wolfe's books.

What do you mean down?  You arrogant yankee?

> Actually it's not really anything like that. I'm just reading a book by
> Thomas Wolfe and the notion entered my mind while perusing your post is
> all.

You are just thinking aloud, is that it?

> Completely out of line and off-topic but I recommend the movie "Genius"
> with Jude Law (great performance by Jude Law).  As well as the books, of
> course.

Book Recommendations...

[MarkEmmanuel]

Hi all!!!  I installed Debian Linux on my Macintosh and I was looking for
book recommendations for a beginner user.  The most I know about Linux/Unix
are the basic commands like ls, chmod, and cd. (I love shell accounts...)
I'm getting really tired of switching to MacOS so I can use the Internet as
a reference and there are many common questions I'm sure the book can answer
that the community doesn't have to.

Also, XFree86 3.3.6, FB_Dev, and Gnome doesn't seem to work properly when I
try to run X Window.  Is there a configuration script I need to edit or
create?  

please email me privately if this does not benefit the list. Thanks.

peace,
--markemmanuel


-o)  Anima Sana In Corpore Sano  (o-
/\\Markemmanuel F. Rodriguez   //\
   _\_VV_/_
  http://www.markemmanuel.org/ 

Re: Book Recommendations...

[Philipp Schulte]

On Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 05:40:55AM -0500, MarkEmmanuel wrote: 

 Hi all!!!  I installed Debian Linux on my Macintosh and I was looking for
 book recommendations for a beginner user.  The most I know about Linux/Unix
 are the basic commands like ls, chmod, and cd. (I love shell accounts...)
 I'm getting really tired of switching to MacOS so I can use the Internet as
 a reference and there are many common questions I'm sure the book can answer
 that the community doesn't have to.

If you want to learn about commands have a look at Linux in a
Nutshell from O'Reilly (IMHO O'Reilly is always a good choice) 
But there is also much documentation on the Web i.e
http://www.linuxdoc.org
 
 Also, XFree86 3.3.6, FB_Dev, and Gnome doesn't seem to work properly when I
 try to run X Window.  Is there a configuration script I need to edit or
 create?  

You should describe more precisely what goes wrong.
The main config-file for XF86 is /etc/X11/XF86Config. It is generated
by programs like XF86Setup.
If XF86 works then gnome should work out of the box. I don't know much
about Framebuffers, sorry.
Phil

Re: Book Recommendations...

[kmself]

on Sun, Oct 22, 2000 at 05:40:55AM -0500, MarkEmmanuel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 
wrote:
 Hi all!!!  I installed Debian Linux on my Macintosh and I was looking for
 book recommendations for a beginner user.  The most I know about Linux/Unix
 are the basic commands like ls, chmod, and cd. (I love shell accounts...)
 I'm getting really tired of switching to MacOS so I can use the Internet as
 a reference and there are many common questions I'm sure the book can answer
 that the community doesn't have to.

My standard book plug follows.


Linux Books mini-FAQ

Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com
Written:  Saturday October  7, 2000
Modified:  Saturday October  7, 2000



In response to the perennial read any good books lately question,
vis-a-vis Linux and Unix, I've compiled the following.  Prices are
approximate.


General Linux  getting started guides.

Mark G. Sobell, _A Practical Guide to Linux_, Addison-Wesley, © 1997 
ISBN 0-201-89549-8, US$40

Matt Welsh and Lar Kaufman, _Running Linux, 3rd Edition_  O'Reilly, ©
2000.  ISBN 1-56592-151-8, US$30



General Linux/Unix system administration -- more advanced topics.  Each
of these references is a classic.  You don't need all three (though I've
got a copy of each), but you'll find within each the distilled wisdom of
experienced system administrators.

AEleen Frisch, _Essential System Administration : Help for Unix
System Administrators_, O'Reilly, © 1996, 788 pages.  ISBN
1-56592-127-5. US$35

Evi Nemeth, Garth Snyder, Scott Seebass, Trent R. Hein _UNIX System
Administration Handbook_ (Bk\CD ROM), Prentice Hall, © 1995, 780
pages, ISBN: 0-13151-051-7. US$75

M. Carling, Stephen Degler,  James Dennis, _Linux System
Administration_, New Riders, © 2000, 337 pages. ISBN 1-56205-934-3.
US$30



It was the following two books (actually, the earlier _UNIX in a
Nutshell_) which put me over the hump in becoming familiar and
experienced with Unix and Linux.  I still refer frequently to each text
when trying to accomplish a complex system task or needing command
syntax and examples that the man pages just don't provide.

Brief command and system reference:

Ellen Siever, Stephen Spainhour, Stephen Figgins, Jessica P. Hekman
_Linux in a Nutshell, 3rd Edition_, O'Reilly, © 2000, 650 pages,
ISBN 1-56592-167-4. US$35


Shell and tools cook book:

Jerry D. Peek, Tim O'Reilly, Mike Loukides, _UNIX Power Tools, 2nd
Edition_, O'Reilly, © 1997, 1120 pages, ISBN: 1-56592-260-3, US$55



You want to reach out and touch someone?  The NAG, as it's
affectionately known, is available online in electronic format, but you
can take the hardcopy to your favorite cafe, the beach, or that most
popluar of technical reading environments, the WC.

Networking:

 Olaf Kirch, Terry Dawson, _Linux Network Administrator's Guide_
 (2nd Edition), O'Reilly, © 2000, 474 pages, ISBN  1-56592-400-2.
 US$35
 Online:  http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/linag2/book/index.html


...when you're tired of people reaching out and touching you...
Garfinkel and Spafford is a classic, though slightly time-worn.  Its
emphasis on philosophy over specific toolsets, and a strong vision on
the part of the authors makes it a worthwhile read even now.

Sonnenreich and Yates have published an excellet guide not just to
building a firewall (this Debian GNU/Linux fan highly recommends the
OpenBSD route), but some excellent front-matter on contemporary elements
and aspects of network security.  Be sure to look at the companion
website as it contains up-to-date information concerning recent changes
to software and distributions, and more advanced firewalling,
monitoring, and proactive security tools.

Security:

Simson Garfinkel, Gene Spafford, _Practical Unix and Internet
Security_, O'Reilly, © 1996, 1004 pages, ISBN: 1-56592-148-8 

Wes Sonnenreich, Tom Yates, _Building Linux and OpenBSD Firewalls_,
John Wiley  Sons, © 2000, 384 pages.  ISBN: 0-47135-366-3.  US$40



As Richard Stallman says, using vi isn't a sin, it's a pennance.  This
handy pocket guide will give you (or answer) a prayer.

Arnold Robbins, _vi Editor Pocket Reference_, O'Reilly, ISBN
1-56592-497-5, US$6.95



-- 
Karsten M. Self kmself@ix.netcom.com http://www.netcom.com/~kmself
 Evangelist, Opensales, Inc.http://www.opensales.org
  What part of Gestalt don't you understand?  There is no K5 cabal
   http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/http://www.kuro5hin.org
GPG fingerprint: F932 8B25 5FDD 2528 D595 DC61 3847 889F 55F2 B9B0


pgpSoJxZWKdU3.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Book Recommendations...

[Bob Bernstein]

 kms == kmself  kmself@ix.netcom.com writes:

kms As Richard Stallman says, using vi isn't a sin, it's a
kms pennance.  This handy pocket guide will give you (or answer)
kms a prayer.

Yes. Once, on a job I was actually being paid for (imagine that) I
found myself planted in front of a SCO Unix system. I was told I was
in charge of it, and to keep it running. In response to my first
question, the vendor (who has since disappeared, presumably to avoid
prosecution) said, Oh, I'm glad you asked that; the only editor is
vi.  That's right, my then-brief life flashed before my eyes, sweat
rolled down my forehead into my eyes, and all vital signs started to
bump up markedly.

Moral to the story: get comfy with vi. It will sneak up on you when
you least expect it. The small O'Reilly book _Learning the vi Editor_
is relatively inexpensive and features a simple walk-through tutorial
that will stand the uninitiated in good stead. It too comes with a
handy reference card.

You have been warned. g

-- 
Bob Bernstein
at
Esmond, R.I., USA

Re: Book Recommendations...

[C. Falconer]

At 11:35 PM 10/22/00 -0400, you wrote:

Moral to the story: get comfy with vi. It will sneak up on you when
you least expect it. The small O'Reilly book _Learning the vi Editor_
is relatively inexpensive and features a simple walk-through tutorial
that will stand the uninitiated in good stead. It too comes with a
handy reference card.



Too true - vi is often the only editor on a rescue/boot disk for space 
reasons, and if the only vi command you know is

Esc : q Enter
then you're in trouble.

cat  filename  EOF
type-out-file-contents-carefully
^D

Thats a *last* resort, especially if the file is XF86Config or something 
huge.  A complex lilo.conf is bad enough :)



--
Criggie