Linux-Advocacy Digest #487, Volume #25 Fri, 3 Mar 00 09:13:08 EST
Contents:
Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Linux Demo Day a letdown (Terry Porter)
Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: How does the free-OS business model work? (Matthias Warkus)
Re: Giving up on NT (Joseph)
Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000 (Edward Rosten)
NYC LOCAL: Saturday 4 March 2000 Big Install Fest ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Linux smp kernel UNSTABLE? (Gary Hallock)
Re: Giving up on NT (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?=)
Re: NYC LOCAL: Saturday 4 March 2000 Big Install Fest (Donn Miller)
Re: Giving up on NT (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?=)
Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000 (Edward Rosten)
Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000 ("Erik Funkenbusch")
Darwin or Linux (Re: The decline of VA Linux) (John Jensen)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 06:35:39 -0600
JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 15:27:50 -0600, Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >What the press release doesn't quite adequately say is that this is a
> >transparent process that happens in the background. Links are not
created
> >manually, the OS finds identical duplicate files and coalesces them into
a
> >single file with links without any user interaction.
>
> Yep, it's going to second guess you. That should be real fun.
What's there to second guess? It's transparent, you won't even know it's
happening.
> >Moreover, it does this without effecting system performance through a new
> >method that allows non-important tasks to run without taking any
resources
> >from more important ones (and we're not just talking nice here. Even
niced
>
> Actually, nice can buy you quite alot all by itself.
It can, but this is a different process.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Porter)
Subject: Re: Linux Demo Day a letdown
Reply-To: No-Spam
Date: 3 Mar 2000 20:34:39 +0800
On Fri, 03 Mar 2000 06:04:53 GMT, Gooba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
As your a previously unseen, anonymous poster, I urge any readers to consider
the fact that you have no established credibility at all, "Gooba".
>Okay, Terry, you've made it abundantly clear how repulsive you want to sound
Interpret it as you wish, your words, ...your opinion.
>and how you likewise want to sounds like Mr. Generic Linux User. I very much
>doubt however the truth of these notions.
Fell free to doubt as mich as you wish, its a free world.
> You're just doing everything
>possible to be a stereotypical elitist jerk.
Good emotionally loaded insults, got any more ?
>If indeed there is any truth to your claims, then you were begging for
>someone to argue with you.
Argue away, ..I'm yer Huckleberry!
>
>Your installations went smoothly because you had a particular collection of
>hardware and software which worked well together.
Thats true, however as it happened I *did not* choose any of my hardware for
Linux, either in 1993, or in 1997. However it IS a good idea to do so.
Same for Windows etc.
> That's all. Linux is
>notoriously choosy about what stuff is supported.
Bullshit.
> I'm a user of Linux and
Ok ..... if you *say* so.
>that's cool by me. I can choose my hardware based on what works with the
>software I want to run.
So does anyone else if they are wise.
>
>Linux is not Windows. That statement is pretty obvious isn't it?
Is it ? You tell us ?
> But it's
>not warranted in this context.
Only in your opinion.
> Linux is competing with Windows.
No its not.
> It may not
>be agressively competing with Windows, but it is competing. A giraffe and an
>elephant compete for the same waterhole, how often do you see them fight?
Linux and Windows aren't competing for anything.
>Are you really cool with the idea of being the only remaining Linux user in
>the world?
Are you really serious ?
> Having to code new drivers for yourself?
Sure
> Reverse engineer or
If needed, np.
>apply for licenses for every new piece of hardware?
No Free Software does NOT do deals with proprietary information owners.
If you had more than a passing introduction with it, you'd know that.
> I think not, this is why
>Linux needs to compete, it needs a certain base number of users/developers
>to remain a viable, modern OS.
Your totally, completely 100% *incorrect*.
>
>In short, we might not need to attack Windows, but we would do best to keep
We ????
>an eye on it.
>
>I would appreciate it if you didn't post anymore.
Sorry I don't do requests for Linux newbies or windows trolls.
>For those who don't
>realize you're an individual making yourself look bad, you're making Linux
>users look bad.
Hey thats your interpetration. Windows is about ***looks***, Free software is
about doing, not looks.
Kind Regards
Terry
--
**** To reach me, use [EMAIL PROTECTED] ****
My Desktop is powered by GNU/Linux, and has been
up 1 week 5 days 10 hours 46 minutes
** homepage http://www.odyssey.apana.org.au/~tjporter **
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 06:38:01 -0600
Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> >
> > What the press release doesn't quite adequately say is that this is a
> > transparent process that happens in the background. Links are not
created
> > manually, the OS finds identical duplicate files and coalesces them into
a
> > single file with links without any user interaction.
>
> Wooooh Hoooo! Backups!!!!
> Hello???????
What are you trying to say?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: How does the free-OS business model work?
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 10:35:33 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the 2 Mar 2000 18:51:31 GMT...
...and Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Mar 2000 17:05:18 +0100, Matthias Warkus wrote:
> >It was the 2 Mar 2000 06:03:29 GMT...
> >...and Donovan Rebbechi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>* Any word processor
> >> >
> >> >Lyx?
> >>
> >> No. Lyx is a front end to a professional typesetting/publishing application.
> >
> >I agree with you that there isn't a free glorified-typewriter word
> >processor on Linux yet. But if one can have what you describe, i.e.
> >professional typesetting with a nice front end, why bother with
> >glorified typewriters at all?
>
> Try embedding a spreadsheet in a LaTeX document.
Exporting a spreadsheet and inserting it in a document is no problem,
but that's not what you ask for. On the other hand, I don't see why a
document that's created in order to be print should be able to contain
a functional spreadsheet. "Active content" that is resolved upon
printout, such as LaTeX's references and indices, is necessary and OK.
But using a word processing document as an application strikes me as a
strange and convoluted solution.
>Or even try writing a macro
> for LaTeX ( yeah, you can write macros, but the programming capabilities
> of TeX are limited at best. )
It's Turing-complete. I've written LaTeX macros, and frankly, it's not
rocket science.
> Try making a flyer using TeX.
That's not what LaTeX is for. But that's not what a word processor is
for, either. It's a DTP job.
> Do you get
> the picture? Try installing and using a new font (gasp)
About as hard as installing any kind of new LaTeX package.
> Word processors are much more sophisticated beasts than typewriters.
Yes. MS Word for example is a hybrid, tacking on some kind of
structural markup to a purely physical engine, thus often modifying
content you enter under your hands; and then it adds some half-hearted
DTP functionality, which causes confusion. I wish they had at least
had the guts to remove the "normal text" functionality completely and
have all the text in frames. That would solve a lot of problems, and
it's what KWord does, for example.
> And they do things that LaTeX cannot do well if at
> all. Frankly, I'm surprised to hear such a silly comment
> from you. Are you the real guy or a Warkus impersonator?
No need to be condescending.
mawa
--
I'm spinning through the apartment like a whirling dervish, finishing
things I'd put off for months. These Methadrine suppositories are
fantastic!
-- Mark Lenyer: My Cousin, My Gastroenterologist
------------------------------
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 01 Mar 2000 19:30:34 GMT
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 2-29-00, 1:11:39 AM, "LP" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re:=20=
Giving up on NT:
> Todd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message=20
news:89co3h$e2l$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > How high can HDTV's go in terms of resolution? PC gamers are now=20=
pushing
> > 1600x1280 with GeForce based cards... the new Voodoo's will go even=
> > higher...
> >
> > I find it hard to believe that HDTV's are going to have this kind of=
> > resolution *and* be as clear as computer monitors need to be.
> Not to mention that the best HDTV's are still grainy, have large pixel=
=20
size and do not have as good a picture quality as a good
> monitor.
> HDTV still requires you to sit several yards/meters away to get an=20=
acceptable picture.
Thank god. HDTV vs. Monitor is no contest. First, who would want an=20=
entertainment technology designed to be viewed at a desk? PCs have=20
had superior video capabilities for years and we have seen 1994/95=20
consoles/TV cream PCs as entertainment devices - even with 1999 PCs. =20=
The PC market is going to shrink and or at best emulate/copy console=20=
content.
As the game technology increases so do production costs. "Newsweek"=20=
cites disturbing statistics. SEGA Saturn games were ~$400,000 to=20
produce. Today a top game title costs 2 million to produce, 4 million=20=
for the PSX II. =20
The PC game publishers are cutting titles, moving to consoles and=20
there is no way a Windows 2000 PC is going to compete for UNIQUE=20
development.=20
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 12:49:22 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> > >
> > > What the press release doesn't quite adequately say is that this is a
> > > transparent process that happens in the background. Links are not
> created
> > > manually, the OS finds identical duplicate files and coalesces them into
> a
> > > single file with links without any user interaction.
> >
> > Wooooh Hoooo! Backups!!!!
> > Hello???????
>
> What are you trying to say?
You back up something, Windows sees it's a duplicate, socreates only one
file. Then for some bad reason (power outage or whatever) your (non
backup) copy gets corrupted. But since windows reckoned that you only
really wanted one file in the firstplace, your backup is corrupted too.
I think that this could be a dangerous feature. Mabey, if you want 2
copies of important files you should be able to have 2 seperate copies
on seperate bits of the hard disk.
If, however, you make thousands fo identical files for the hell of it,
you deserve to run out of disk space.
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold weather is
because
of all the fish in the atmosphere?
-The Hackenthorpe Book Of Lies
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc
Subject: NYC LOCAL: Saturday 4 March 2000 Big Install Fest
Date: 3 Mar 2000 07:50:32 -0500
>From 11:00 am to 4:00 pm on Saturday 4 March 2000 the Free OS Beginners
Group, also known as the GNU/X/other/BSD/Linux Beginners SIG, in
cooperation with NYLUG and CALC/Canterbury and Linuxcare University, and
with the help of many regular troops and irregulars of the Cause, will
throw a big Install Fest in Midtown Manhattan.
This Install Fest is free and open to the public.
Lyn Ohira of the Beginners SIG and Denis Ford of CALC/Canterbury are lead
contacts for this event.
For updates and useful technical and other information see
http://www.eskimo.com/~lo/linux
If you intend to come to this Install Fest a short email to
Denis Ford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> will help, but come even if you do not get a
chance to email.
<blockquote
from="Jim Gleason, President of NYLUG">
Denis Ford and Al Ballerini from Calc Canterbury are really great guys who
will make this installfest one to remember. It is an all day affair, so no
technical problem will go unresolved. While you're there, check out the
Linux training classes: www.calc.com
- Jim
</blockquote>
Below is the official announcement.
Jay Sulzberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Corresponding Secretary LXNY
LXNY is New York's Free Computing Organization.
http://www.lxny.org
<blockquote
edit-level="light">
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: NYC Installfest Saturday, March 4, 2000
The Free OS Beginners Group, in coordination with NYLUG, is hosting an
Install Fest on Saturday, March 4th, 2000 at CALC/Canterbury. All are
invited, and through the generosity of CALC and Linuxcare University this
event is free of charge. An RSVP to [EMAIL PROTECTED] would be appreciated
to help us plan for space allocation.
Install Fest Particulars
Day: Saturday 4 March 2000
Hours: 11:00 AM until 4:00 PM-ish
Host: CALC/Canterbury
Place: 780 Third Avenue
between 48th and 49th Street
Floor C-1
The nearest parking garage is on 47th Street
between Third and Lexington Avenue.
The nearest subway station is the big E, F, and 6 station
at 51st to 53rd Streets on Lexington Avenue.
We have monitors, keyboards and mice (PS-2 connectors only), desks, LAN
internet connection, etc. We'll also have a number of classroom PC's
available in case people want to fool around with a clean installation.
People can do lunch on their own or we can all chip in and have pizzas
delivered. CALC will provide soda.
Any change in plans will be posted to the Beginners Group's website at
http://www.eskimo.com/~lo/linux and distributed through nylug-announce.
If you have any questions please contact Denis Ford at [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
</blockquote>
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 07:51:52 -0500
From: Gary Hallock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux smp kernel UNSTABLE?
Kyo-Bang Chung wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I report that kernel-2.2.12smp and kernel-2.2.15smp is unstable
> for some programs, very unfortunately, such as mine.
>
> My program runs well on kernel-2.2.12 and kernel-2.2.15, and
> crashes on the smp versions of both.
>
> I tested with three compilers (PGI, Fujitsu, Absoft)
> on both single- and dual-CPU (Intel PIII). The result are the same.
>
> The reason I use Linux is the support of muliti-processor.
>
> Does anyone have any idea of what is going on the smp kernel development?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Kyo-Bang Chung
Are you sure it's not your program that is at fault? If you are using
threads without proper locks on shared resources, it's easy to have a
program fail when moving it to smp.
Gary
------------------------------
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 14:01:21 +0100
"JEDIDIAH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message news:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<SNIP> A little bit of stuff </SNIP>
> Sucks vs. mebbe sucks more, all in the context of users
"mebbe sucks more" ? Have you tried to multitask on a Mac recently ?
from http://www.arstechnica.com/reviews/2q99/g3-350/g3-350-5.html
G3 with MacOS 8.5.1
PII with Windows NT
RC5 Bovine, K-keys/sec
K-keys/sec
G3 350 1150
PII 450 1193
Client in foreground
RC5 Bovine, K-keys/sec
K-keys/sec
G3 350 1055
PII 450 1171
Client in background, foreground idle
RC5 Bovine, K-keys/sec
G3 350 43
PII 450 1122
Client in background, 1GB file copy in foreground
So RC5 is 27 times slower with a 1 GB file copy in the foreground under
MacOS 8.5.1
On NT RC5 is 1.06 tiimes slower.
See, even if Win9x multitasking was twice inferior to the Nt [which it is
not and Caesar from ars-technica I quoted below agrees with me], Windows9x
would still be more than 10 times more efficient that the Mac.
If I bring on the CD burning issue, the Mac won't even update the _time_,
while I can listen to MP3, surf the web, read news, download stuff...
"mebbe sucks more", yeah right.
"I'm willing to wager that MacOS 8.6 will improve this score, though I'm not
certain it will raise it to the level of NT (which, by the way, is not that
much more efficient than Windows 9x in terms of multitasking, although it's
certainly more stable.)."
> that very likely don't care either way. Otherwise, they
> would be running Linux or NT.
Depends, is Linux multitasking si so much superior to NT, according to
Winstone in a multitasking environment, NT is up to 20 to 60% faster than
Windows9x ?
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1008&p=4
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1008&p=8
Business Winstone 99 [A multitasking test with Office Suites running
concurrently with Navigator]
All systems with 128MB of RAM.
First figure is Windows 98, second Windows NT, third how faster is NT
compared to 9x. I've taken many different processors to have a better
sampling.
P III 600 / 25.3 - 31.3 / 24%
K6-3 400 / 21.3 - 28.4 / 33%
P II 400 / 19.2 - 26.5 / 38%
Celeron 400 / 18.4 - 26.5 / 44%
K6-2 300 / 13.7 - 22.2 / 62% *
P Pro 200 / 13.3 - 17.2 / 29 %
*The Windows98 of the K6-2 300 figure seems abnormally low.
And there are things that Windows9x does or support that Linux/NT may lack.
> Resistance is not futile. / | \
Paul 'Z' Ewande
------------------------------
Subject: Re: NYC LOCAL: Saturday 4 March 2000 Big Install Fest
From: Donn Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 03 Mar 2000 08:06:04 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> From 11:00 am to 4:00 pm on Saturday 4 March 2000 the Free OS
> Beginners Group, also known as the GNU/X/other/BSD/Linux Beginners
> SIG, in cooperation with NYLUG and CALC/Canterbury and Linuxcare
> University, and with the help of many regular troops and irregulars
> of the Cause, will throw a big Install Fest in Midtown Manhattan.
This sound like something Steve ought to attend. =) He sucks at
installing operating systems. In fact, I think Steve's installation
problems aren't specific to Linux -- the man just flat out isn't very
good at using a computer.
--
- Donn
------------------------------
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Paul_'Z'_Ewande=A9?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Giving up on NT
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 14:09:46 +0100
"Joseph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message news:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 3-3-00, 2:07:26 AM, "Todd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re:
Giving up on NT:
> > As for speed. Basically there is very little. NT is slower the 95.
> Not according to the benchmarks that measure graphics and business
> performance.
> Just recently, benchmarks that measured 98/NT and 2000 came out, do
you want
> to know what scored highest? 2000.
> Second? NT.
> Last? 9x.
Oh Sure. That's why Windows2000 has the highest system requirements -
because it's the fastest OS.
Well, I know that once you have enough memory [64+ MB], NT is faster than
9x. 2K is no different. Is 2K faster than NT, I don't know, maybe... Now,
with 32 MB, 9x will be faster than NT/2K.
<SNIP> Some stuff </SNIP>
Paul 'Z Ewande
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 07:15:20 -0600
Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You back up something, Windows sees it's a duplicate, socreates only one
> file. Then for some bad reason (power outage or whatever) your (non
> backup) copy gets corrupted. But since windows reckoned that you only
> really wanted one file in the firstplace, your backup is corrupted too.
> I think that this could be a dangerous feature. Mabey, if you want 2
> copies of important files you should be able to have 2 seperate copies
> on seperate bits of the hard disk.
We're not talking about your local hard disk here. We're talking about a
server with a distributed file system.
Even so. that's what a journaled file system is for, to prevent corruption.
If the power goes out, you simply back out the last transactions. But, even
so. Such corruption would only occur with files that are being modified.
Since SIS copies on modification, you would again have two copies as soon as
you started modifying the file.
If your hard disk crashed, then there could be problems, but then that's
what RAID and tape backups are for.
> If, however, you make thousands fo identical files for the hell of it,
> you deserve to run out of disk space.
Let's see you prevent 10,000 users from putting duplicate files in their
home directories.
------------------------------
From: Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2000 13:30:08 +0000
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > You back up something, Windows sees it's a duplicate, socreates only one
> > file. Then for some bad reason (power outage or whatever) your (non
> > backup) copy gets corrupted. But since windows reckoned that you only
> > really wanted one file in the firstplace, your backup is corrupted too.
> > I think that this could be a dangerous feature. Mabey, if you want 2
> > copies of important files you should be able to have 2 seperate copies
> > on seperate bits of the hard disk.
>
> We're not talking about your local hard disk here. We're talking about a
> server with a distributed file system.
>
> Even so. that's what a journaled file system is for, to prevent corruption.
> If the power goes out, you simply back out the last transactions. But, even
> so. Such corruption would only occur with files that are being modified.
> Since SIS copies on modification, you would again have two copies as soon as
> you started modifying the file.
copy my_improtant_file my_important_file.bak
result is one file anctally stored on the hard disk?
>
> If your hard disk crashed, then there could be problems, but then that's
> what RAID and tape backups are for.
True, but what about workstations, they won't have RAID systems. True,
but you may want to back up config files etc... on disk, but, granted, a
tape backup can always be used as a last resort.
> > If, however, you make thousands fo identical files for the hell of it,
> > you deserve to run out of disk space.
>
> Let's see you prevent 10,000 users from putting duplicate files in their
> home directories.
A disk quota prevents them from going over quota. if they make many
pointless copies, it only affects them. But, they should be able to make
seperate backup copies if they want. I wouldn't object to a utility that
tells users how much space is wasted in duplicate files. That could be
useful.
I think that you should be able to have more control over your computer
than that. It wouldn't be that bad if you could switch it off - I would.
I'm not looking at this and saying MS probably will get it wrong & screw
up loads of files, but UN*X, if it did it would do it well - which ever
OS was doing it, I would think it was a bad idea.
I don't mind, however, explicit symbolic and hard links, because if you
are using them, you are in control, and I like the idea of controling my
computer how I want.
--
Did you know that the reason that windows steam up in cold weather is
because
of all the fish in the atmosphere?
-The Hackenthorpe Book Of Lies
------------------------------
From: "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Symbolic Links for WinBlows 2000
Date: Fri, 3 Mar 2000 08:06:10 -0600
Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > We're not talking about your local hard disk here. We're talking about
a
> > server with a distributed file system.
> >
> > Even so. that's what a journaled file system is for, to prevent
corruption.
> > If the power goes out, you simply back out the last transactions. But,
even
> > so. Such corruption would only occur with files that are being
modified.
> > Since SIS copies on modification, you would again have two copies as
soon as
> > you started modifying the file.
>
> copy my_improtant_file my_important_file.bak
>
> result is one file anctally stored on the hard disk?
Yes. Though changing my_important_file will cause there to be two files,
your modified and the original backup.
> > If your hard disk crashed, then there could be problems, but then that's
> > what RAID and tape backups are for.
>
> True, but what about workstations, they won't have RAID systems. True,
> but you may want to back up config files etc... on disk, but, granted, a
> tape backup can always be used as a last resort.
We're not talking about workstations. We're talking about servers with
distributed file systems.
> > Let's see you prevent 10,000 users from putting duplicate files in their
> > home directories.
> A disk quota prevents them from going over quota. if they make many
> pointless copies, it only affects them. But, they should be able to make
> seperate backup copies if they want. I wouldn't object to a utility that
> tells users how much space is wasted in duplicate files. That could be
> useful.
No, not the users themselves duplicating files. But multiple users with the
same file in their home directory (for instance, it could be an mpg file
they got sent in an email that they are now storing in their local
directory. 5000 users doing this would use up a ton of disk space, but with
SIS this file is kept once for all of them.)
> I think that you should be able to have more control over your computer
> than that. It wouldn't be that bad if you could switch it off - I would.
It's something you have to install in the first place. If you install it,
why would you complain if it's there?
> I'm not looking at this and saying MS probably will get it wrong & screw
> up loads of files, but UN*X, if it did it would do it well - which ever
> OS was doing it, I would think it was a bad idea.
> I don't mind, however, explicit symbolic and hard links, because if you
> are using them, you are in control, and I like the idea of controling my
> computer how I want.
All this is, is an implementation detail. Why should you care how the file
is stored on the server?
------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.next.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Darwin or Linux (Re: The decline of VA Linux)
Date: 3 Mar 2000 14:03:29 GMT
mbkennel@ yahoo.spam-B-gone.com <REMOVETHEBADDOMAIN> writes:
: Yes. The claim was that Linux has its own independent momentum and
: community about it (true) that Darwin will not (true) and therefore Apple
: just 'has' to do something with Linux like use it instead of Darwin and
: write free OpenStep for Linux (false). Oh yeah and h/w clones too.
As I've said, I think that Apple can make a tidy business with MacOS X on
their proprietary hardware. (In the short term, anyway.) Just the same,
I think it is important to remember that consumers may have other
priorities. Your reference to clones is an excellent case in point. A
lot of consumers felt that they needed clones to have confidence in the
Mac platform. The clone-killing decision went down hard - to stay with
the Mac you had to accept a reduction in choice.
Apple doesn't have to do anything with Linux, but as with clone-killing
they are defining the limits to their business. Linux on the other hand,
has less well-defined borders. People use Mac software in one place only
(on Macintoshes), while Linux continues to creep into the most unlikely
situations.
I'm sure that enough people will like the Mac as a product that Apple
factories will humm for some time, but I find it hard to get excited about
that. I find it much more interesting when the Chinese, the American NSA,
and Swedish phone companies are choosing the same open soruce OS.
John
------------------------------
** 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.advocacy) 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-Advocacy Digest
******************************
