Day Brown wrote: > > From what I can tell, if I have one distro on a drive, > and want to try another, it will also install a new copy > of netscape,
Not necessarily. Slackware and Debian don't work this way. You have to specify which packages to install. If you don't want a new copy of netscape, don't select it. > and I have the tedious job of rebuilding my bookmark file. I don't know about the other versions of netscape, but 3.04 has a bookmarks.html file that is easy to copy. > Maybe some of you know about Arachne. Their hotlist.htm is > plain and simple bookmarks.html is not that different. > and easy to edit with any wordprocessor, Despite the warning at the top of bookmarks.html, you could probably edit it with a wordprocessor. I've never tried it, but I often edit the cookies file (which has a similar warning). > it aint hard to find, ~/.netscape/bookmarks.html > it can be easily transfered from one drive to any other, ditto bookmarks.html > with a text editor is easy to cut and paste or regroup the websites. I haven't used Arachne in a while, but I do remember messing things up when I carelessly edited hotlist.html with a text editor. It's not foolproof. With care you could probably edit bookmarks.html the same way (although it would be safer to use netscape's built-in bookmark editor). > If I wanted to replace DR-DOS with ROM-DOS, FREEDOS, or even some > MS-DOS, no problem, duck soup. sys.com will getcha there. sys.com transfers how many files? Three? Less than 500kb. This is comparable to changing the kernel in Linux (which is just as easy). > But the Nix distros are all so complex, Because they go way beyond the kernel. They include libraries, editors, a zillion utilities, megabytes of documentation, a choice of window managers, a complete compiler (or two), a wide range of applications, and on and on. The curse of Linux (and its greatest blessing) is the enormous pile of free software. It's just too easy for the mainstream distributions to fill CDs with this stuff. And, why not? One user prefers vi, another emacs, another joe, another pico. Once prefers kde, another gnome, another icewm, another blackbox. Why not give them all what they want? > I dont see how ordinary users can do anything but overwrite the > whole damn partition. If you want to install a complete distribution, this is probably a sensible way to go. But it's also possible to install individual packages, either as binary (.rpm or .deb) or source (which you compile yourself). > And while theoretically, I should be able to copy WINE and > Corel's PHOTOPAINT & WORDPERFECT to one of my other distros, > dependancies seem so complex Not so complex. ldd [filename] will tell you whether you have the necessary libraries for that executable. If you are missing one, you install it. You only have to do this once. Next time an executable needs that library, it will be there. > It is like needing a different edition of Arachne or Neopaint > for every dos distribution I seem to remember a version of Arachne that didn't work with one DOS or another. I think it needed the 'move' command (or something like that). Anyway, the problem was easily solved by adding that command. Same in Linux. If you are missing a necessary component in your installation, you can add it. Cheers, Steven To unsubscribe from SURVPC send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with unsubscribe SURVPC in the body of the message. Also, trim this footer from any quoted replies. More info can be found at; http://www.softcon.com/archives/SURVPC.html
