Linux-Development-Sys Digest #247, Volume #6 Sat, 9 Jan 99 19:14:33 EST
Contents:
Re: subscribe (Nix)
Re: Open Storage of Application Configuration (was Registry Thread) (George
MacDonald)
Re: silly question (George MacDonald)
Re: Raiding Under Linux? (Michael Zieger)
Re: Open Configuration Storage - was Registry for Linux (Frank Sweetser)
Re: Ram And comp.Fan (David Fox)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Luke Scharf)
Support for Promise FASTTRAK? ("Peter Anttu")
Re: GUI, The Next Generation (Jens Baaran)
Re: Ram And comp.Fan (Erik de Castro Lopo)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (jedi)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (jedi)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (steve mcadams)
Re: Open Configuration Storage - was Registry for Linux (Frank Sweetser)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Navindra Umanee)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Christopher B. Browne)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xin{$@esperi.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: subscribe
Date: 08 Jan 1999 04:16:07 +0000
Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> JiSook Kim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > subscibe
>
> ok, you are subscribed.
ITYM `subscibed'.
> to unsubscribe, send a message to alt.test with the subject
> `unsubscribe <newsgroup>'
That's the old Usenet 0.5 draft standard. The 1.0 Standard, finalised
on 922 September 1993, states that such a post should be crossposted
to alt.test, alt.religion.kibology, and alt.hell-and-back.
HTH.
--
`Anyone who says you can have a lot of widely dispersed people hack
away on a complicated piece of code and avoid total anarchy has never
managed a software project.' - Andy Tanenbaum in 1992 on comp.os.minix
------------------------------
From: George MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Open Storage of Application Configuration (was Registry Thread)
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 1999 22:56:22 GMT
George MacDonald wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Johan Kullstam writes:
> > > put user application configuration in /usr/etc.
> >
> > That could be awkward when /usr is mounted r/o and/or NFS. Everything
> > local to a particular box should be in /etc. Look at the FHS.
> >
> > > also, there's no need for the `conf.d' part. simply being part of /etc
> > > means its a configuration file. the `d' can maybe stay but i think
> > > that's redundant too.
> >
> > Usually, the `d' means that there is a script somewhere that runs
> > `run-parts' over the scripts in the directory.
> >
> > > if the application has *one* configuration file, it could be a straight
> > > file under the appropriate etc directory. if the application >has more
> > > than one file, make a directory.
> >
> > It may be better to create the directory anyway, in case the application
> > acquires more files in the future.
>
> Hmm,
>
> The ".d" looks like a naming convention used to distiguish between a
> file and a directory that would otherwise bear the same name. I think
> the first use was simply to note the distinction between
>
> /etc/rc and a directory that was replacing it
>
> Red Hat seems to have used it also for /etc/logrotate.d ,
> /etc/profile.d and /etc/pam.d
>
> Was there a /etc/logrotate or a /etc/pam before?
>
> Well it doesn't much matter to me, a /etc/opStore or /etc/opStore.d
> is fine. I would like to have the /etc/opStore.conf though.
>
> Also longer term I was thinking of defining other "stores" i.e
>
> opStore
> |
> |
> V
> OpenStore = UserStore + AppStore + SystemStore + NetStore ( + otherStores)
>
> Where the UserStore is user specific, System store handles system
> related info(hostname info, passwd, file system, ...)
> AppStore handles the application specific info(i.e. default settings),
> NetStore handles things stored on the network.
>
> The UsersStore has it's own data, pulls in data from the other stores,
> and/or defines "views" into the other stores to define how to get the data.
> The various stores would be configured in the /etc/opStore.conf file.
>
> i.e.
>
> AppStore: /usr/etc/AppStore
>
> or
>
> AppStore: /usr/local/lib/AppStore
>
> B.t.w. I just checked with the companay that uses the name www.openstore.com
> and they said it was ok if we wanted to use www.openstore.org! So I
> was thinking of expanding the name to OpenStore. What do you think?
>
> I think Frank is correct in puting the "configuration about where to get
> the application configuration info" in /etc/opStore.d . I would also
> like to allow the definition of macros in opStore.conf that can
> be used in the /etc/opStore.d files. For example it would be nice to
> define common "switch" settings, perhaps to define a "mobile",
> "dockedAtHome", "dockedAtWork" macros that define
> the "how to find config info" settings for each of those contexts.
>
Hmm. that's not quite right. Information on how a "store" in general
gets its data is Meta data about the store. It's more like a list
of access methods or mechanisms, pehaps a list of possible methods,
then a list of ordered method lists. This is getting kind of lispy,
I can see why gnome is scheme'ified.
So each store can have a default access list, i.e. for that store
the default order in which information is retrieved. These of
course can then be overriden by each type/class of object in
it's store, and then also by each instance. Hmm, yeah that
sounds better.
So each instance of a variable has an evaluation tree that
is processed to determine it's value. Thus to determine the
value, start at the head, then evaluate each "node" in a
breadth first, ordered manner, until the evaluation is
complete(i.e. obtains the desired value). What we have been
talking about is how to define the evaluation tree.
The depth and breadth of the evaluation tree can be as
large as is needed. i.e. a local flat file is
depth=1, breadth=1
fetching the value from an application default, using a RDBMS
might be at node
depth=2, breadth=2
Sorry, this is a bit abstract and I am kind of thinking out
loud. Does this make sense?
--
We stand on the shoulders of those giants who coded before.
Build a good layer, stand strong, and prepare for the next wave.
Guide those who come after you, give them your shoulder, lend them your code.
Code well and live! - [EMAIL PROTECTED] (7th Coding Battalion)
------------------------------
From: George MacDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: silly question
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 21:40:19 GMT
David D. Gitchell wrote:
>
> George MacDonald wrote:
> >
> > see the man page for duhduh(8), it's a secret command that is only
> > visible to root users who put the secret word "..." into a file
> > called /...enableHacks. You need to use fsdb to create the file,
> > then set it permissions 9876543210.
> >
> > Hope this helps
>
> That was really helpful, George. Thanks.
>
> BTW: You wouldn't by any chance have another email address
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"...?
Ask a silly question!
Moi, s.b. Excuse my french
--
We stand on the shoulders of those giants who coded before.
Build a good layer, stand strong, and prepare for the next wave.
Guide those who come after you, give them your shoulder, lend them your code.
Code well and live! - [EMAIL PROTECTED] (7th Coding Battalion)
------------------------------
From: Michael Zieger <"[nospam]psenews"@zmi.at>
Crossposted-To: linux.dev.kernel,linux.dev.raid
Subject: Re: Raiding Under Linux?
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 21:44:18 GMT
ncc1701d wrote:
>
Hi Trekki! Life long and prosper ;-)
> Got a few questions and was wondering if anyone could help me out. I know
> that Raiding under Linux is supported, but I need to know a few specifics:
Read the Root-RAID-HOWTO. It also tells you where to read on.
mike
------------------------------
From: Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Open Configuration Storage - was Registry for Linux
Date: 09 Jan 1999 10:32:22 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> And will you be able to copy among the config sets as easily
> >> as you can with files to duplicate an existing setup before
> >> starting to make changes?
> >
> >no reason why not to.
>
> If you take the data out of normal files, you somehow need to provide
> most of the functionality we take for granted with files: access
> permissions, copying, deleting, renaming, compressing, diff'ing,
> doing backups, and so on. Or at least import/export with files.
*some* of the data *can* be taken out of flat text files, not all. for
example, company defaults can be kept on a corprorate web server, and so
would be subject to however the web server is managed. private user
settings could still be kept locally in a flat text file, and still able
to be manipulated as such.
> >the application itself won't directly grab the information. it'll just
> >call the opstore_get_config (or whatever) function, which in turn consults
> >the metadata information, and from there gets the information from a flat
> >text file, http, /proc, RDBMS, or whatever other module has been defined.
> >the app won't even know where the data is coming from, let alone have to
> >really care.
>
> Someone has to care, since someone has to configure it. The last
> thing I want is yet-another-protocol service to manage in the name
> of making things simpler. If this needs more than ordinary files
> and possibly NFS, can it use some existing protocol like http or
> LDAP?
yes, it can. in fact, it will be able to use any of them or all of them.
however, it doesn't need them inheriently.
> Also, if you set up a hierarchy of settings, who will be in
> control? I lean towards anarchy myself and like schemes where
> the most local system must explictly request data from it's 'parent'
> system and is allowed to override or ignore it, but I know others
> take the opposite approach.
there's no reason why the default settings have to be complex. the default
settings might simply poing to /etc/opStore/<app>.conf, then to
~/.opStore/<app>.conf, with the latter taking precedence. however, the
sysadmin and the user both would have the option of adding opStore
configuration settings to pull in settings from other locations, both local
files or various remote resources.
--
Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu fsweetser at blee.net | PGP key available
paramount.ind.wpi.edu RedHat 5.2 kernel 2.2.0pre5ac1 i586 | at public servers
Unless Linux violates IP rights, it will fail to deliver innovation over
the long run.
- from Microsoft's response to the Halloween documents
------------------------------
From: d s f o x @ c o g s c i . u c s d . e d u (David Fox)
Subject: Re: Ram And comp.Fan
Date: 09 Jan 1999 13:57:48 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (User470357) writes:
> Small remark I notice that my labtops fan does turn on under linux
> does anyone know how to get around this (it gets to hot and I have
> to turn it off)
If you haven't already, installing a kernel with APM (advanced power
management) enabled would probably help.
--
David Fox http://hci.ucsd.edu/dsf xoF divaD
UCSD HCI Lab baL ICH DSCU
------------------------------
From: Luke Scharf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 10:08:37 -0500
> In newsgroups you see gurus working hard answering tough questions
> because they enjoy using their knowledge and receiving the thanks of
> those they help.
A more cynical view is that they do it for the ego trip... :)
On the other hand, if they get a good discussion going, everyone learns
something.
-Luke
------------------------------
From: "Peter Anttu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Support for Promise FASTTRAK?
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999 15:31:24 +0100
I was wondering if there is any support for the Promise Fasttrak controller
for Linux and in that case what of the RAID modes are supported?
/peteran
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jens Baaran)
Subject: Re: GUI, The Next Generation
Date: 9 Jan 1999 22:36:16 GMT
Sami Tikka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> 3. Why do we need a Mouse (or keyboard
>> - it may be obvious but think about it...)?
>
> I really hate to take my hands off the keyboard. I can touch-type pretty
> well and whenever I take my right hand off the keyboard and bring it back
> after a mouse movement, it takes some time to find the right place.
How about a mouse-like device which is moved by ones feet ?
At least organists, piano players and drummers
would't have any problem with such a device.
There could be two seperate ones:
1 for the buttons another for pointer movement,
each controlled by one foot.
They would have to be a little bigger as ordinary mice
so maybe we'll call them rats? :-)
Jens Baaran
------------------------------
From: Erik de Castro Lopo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ram And comp.Fan
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1999 08:18:11 +1100
User470357 wrote:
>
> I would like to know if linux becomes much faster with more ram or does it
> have a little effect. Say I had 16 mb and upgrade to 144 mb would I see a great
> diffrence in speed in command line and in x windows.
That depends on whether or not you are using swap space at the moment. If you
are not running X and are only editing and compiling at the console, you might
not be using more than 16 Mb of ram, so buying more won't make Linux run faster.
If you are using X and Netscape and the Gimp all at once your machine will
be swapping like crazy and you should bet some more ram. 64 Mb is a generous
amount of RAM for most applications of a Linux machine.
Run the "free" command when you have you heaviest load and add RAM
accordingly.
Erik
--
+-------------------------------------------------+
Erik de Castro Lopo [EMAIL PROTECTED]
+-------------------------------------------------+
"Windows NT - How to make a 100 MIPS Linux workstation perform like
an 8 MHz 286" -- Christopher B. Browne
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999 13:03:29 -0800
On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 14:48:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi) wrote:
>> >Yet another cryptic and irrelevant message from you! Why don't you
>> >ever say directly whatever it is you're trying to say? Why is it
>> >relevant that Troll Tech is a company? RedHat is a company too.
>>
>> Redhat doesn't retain singular ownership of anything.
>> If they did, they would be no less dangerous than
>> Troll or Microsoft.
>>
>> Read up on what a company or corporation is.
>
>Jedi, your grasp on reality is starting to look... inadequate.
>I would be very very surprised if the software written by Red Hat
>employees on work time didnt have a nice "copyright by Red Hat" sign on
>it.
You can do better than that. Why lie? You can just point
us all to the references.
>
>Red Hat does own the code they create, just like Troll Tech and Microsoft.
>That you have a copy of it under the GPL doesn't mean they can't later
>re-release it under a proprietary license.
[deletia]
--
Herding Humans ~ Herding Cats
Neither will do a thing unless they really want to, or |||
is coerced to the point where it will scratch your eyes out / | \
as soon as your grip slips.
In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1999 13:01:40 -0800
On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 02:12:17 GMT, steve mcadams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[Snipped for brevity, quoted material marked with ">"]
>On Fri, 08 Jan 1999 17:02:35 -0500, Victor Danilchenko
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> *I* buy Linux distribution because I want to support the company -- but
>>the whole point is that I CHOSE to pay, I could have gotten it without
>>paying. This freedom of choice is the whole crux of the matter -- I may
>>have as well just donated my $40 to a worthy cause of GNU/Linux
>>development.
>
>You're a lot more altruistic than me. *I* buy Linux distributions
One does not need to buy distributions for that purpose.
>because I'd rather spend a few bucks on the CDs than spend a day each
>downloading 600meg images. The result is the same though, the economy
>is churning along doing its economic thing. -steve
--
Herding Humans ~ Herding Cats
Neither will do a thing unless they really want to, or |||
is coerced to the point where it will scratch your eyes out / | \
as soon as your grip slips.
In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 1999 22:55:29 GMT
[Snipped for brevity, quoted material marked with ">"]
On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 14:48:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Red Hat does own the code they create, just like Troll Tech and Microsoft.
>That you have a copy of it under the GPL doesn't mean they can't later
>re-release it under a proprietary license.
>
>Yes, jedi, just like you always said Troll Tech would do (and apparently you
>still think so). Of course I don't think Red Hat will, just like I knew TT
>wouldn't, but then again I don't live in that dark world you live in.
>
>BTW: same argument works with the FSF. The only code owner I know that
>has made legal arrangements for this not to happen is Troll Tech. Amazing,
>isn't it?
Please explain how TrollTech has "made legal arrangements for this not
to happen", and by that it looks like you are talking about their
releasing their code under a proprietary license? -steve
========================================================
Tools for programmers: http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Open Configuration Storage - was Registry for Linux
Date: 09 Jan 1999 12:10:46 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Have you looked at how nsswitch works? Just a thought.
now you've got the idea =) do for a general configuration api what
nsswitch does for gethostbyname, but with even more flexibility.
--
Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu fsweetser at blee.net | PGP key available
paramount.ind.wpi.edu RedHat 5.2 kernel 2.2.0pre5ac1 i586 | at public servers
"Use of unesessary violence in the apprehension of the Blues Brothers
has been approved."
------------------------------
From: Navindra Umanee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: 9 Jan 1999 23:58:09 GMT
steve mcadams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please explain how TrollTech has "made legal arrangements for this not
> to happen", and by that it looks like you are talking about their
> releasing their code under a proprietary license? -steve
http://www.troll.no/kde-freeqt/ for a scanned copy of the legal
documents.
-N.
--
"These download files are in Microsoft Word 6.0 format. After unzipping,
these files can be viewed in any text editor, including all versions of
Microsoft Word, WordPad, and Microsoft Word Viewer." [Microsoft quote]
< http://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~navindra/editors/ >
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher B. Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: 10 Jan 1999 00:09:02 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 09 Jan 1999 14:48:45 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Red Hat does own the code they create, just like Troll Tech and Microsoft.
>That you have a copy of it under the GPL doesn't mean they can't later
>re-release it under a proprietary license.
But unlike Troll Tech and Microsoft, they have released all of the software
that they have produced (at least, that we know of) under either the GPL or
the LGPL, which means that were they to re-release under another license,
people could feel free to take the old (L)GPL releases, fork the development
tree, and move ahead, ignoring Red Hat.
In effect, Red Hat Software has taken their "crown prince," and sent him
along with each copy of their software as a hostage to their good
intentions. If they *don't* act with good intent, we can all "slay" the
proprietary version of (say) RPM in favor of the "free" version that we
already have in our hands. We can continue to develop RPM; its license
leaves us free to do so.
You can't do that with MSFT-licensed software, and, assuming the contractual
arrangement concerning the "BSDL-ing" of "Free-Qt" hasn't been signed yet
(dunno), you can't do that with notable bits of Troll Tech code such as Qt.
Regardless, the "Free-Qt" clause isn't supposed to take effect until some
disaster ensues, and since that hasn't happened yet, it's not free software
based on any definition other than "gratuit"...
--
Those who do not understand Unix are condemned to reinvent it, poorly.
-- Henry Spencer <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - "What have you contributed to Linux today?..."
------------------------------
** 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.development.system) 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-Development-System Digest
******************************
