Linux-Advocacy Digest #77, Volume #26 Tue, 11 Apr 00 13:13:25 EDT
Contents:
Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped (Darren Winsper)
Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X ("Christopher Smith")
Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead? (Donal K. Fellows)
Why so little discussion of the Netscape 6 preview on c.o.l.a? ("Mark Weaver")
An apology (was GPL will die) ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: A few minutes of your time... (SamIam)
Re: 2000: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine! (Wolfgang Weisselberg)
Re: Why so little discussion of the Netscape 6 preview on c.o.l.a? (Tim Kelley)
Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000? (Jim)
Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X (Craig Kelley)
Re: BSD & Linux (Kenneth P. Stox)
Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X (Craig Kelley)
Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse (Craig Kelley)
Re: GPL WILL die...Just a matter of time....... (Craig Kelley)
Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES (or
MDI for that matter) (Nix)
Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES (or
MDI for that matter) (Nix)
Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES (or
MDI for that matter) (Nix)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Nix)
Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary (Nix)
Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X ("Chuck Swiger")
Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X ("Chuck Swiger")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux
Subject: Re: 10 things with Linux I wish I knew before i jumped
Date: 11 Apr 2000 15:20:55 GMT
On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 22:43:53 -0400, Frederick Artiss
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I used the instructions on altering the XF86Config file, NOT IM Wheel. I
> can't say if IM wheel worrks or not, because I haven't tried, but I CAN say
> that the instructions on modifying the XF86Config file did not work.
I neglected one thing:
Protocol "IMPS/2"
Just using PS/2 won't work.
--
Darren Winsper (El Capitano) - ICQ #8899775
Stellar Legacy project member - http://www.stellarlegacy.tsx.org
DVD boycotts. Are you doing your bit?
This message was typed before a live studio audience.
------------------------------
From: "Christopher Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 01:25:56 +1000
"Marcel Weiher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8cv5po$6ig$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Sascha Bohnenkamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>
> >> Given Darwin is Open Source, it is certainly doable to add ELF binary
> >> support to MacOS X and provide the hooks so that ldd looks for the
> >> Linux shared libs.
> >Darwin != MacOSX
>
> But Darwin is the OS foundation of MacOSX, so the question is quite
> valid.
Near as I can tell, Darwin is OS X with all the interesting and compelling
bits removed.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.system
Subject: Re: Absolute failure of Linux dead ahead?
Date: 11 Apr 2000 15:20:50 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Tom Mitchell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Are there M3 compilers in the gnu world that are up to the task?
> At least three processor targets.
I think the one I'd heard of (log ago, admittedly) used the gcc
back-end, so targetting loads of processors shouldn't be a problem.
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- The small advantage of not having California being part of my country would
be overweighed by having California as a heavily-armed rabid weasel on our
borders. -- David Parsons <o r c @ p e l l . p o r t l a n d . o r . u s>
------------------------------
From: "Mark Weaver" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Why so little discussion of the Netscape 6 preview on c.o.l.a?
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 15:39:26 GMT
There's been quite a bit of discussion in the Mac advocacy group, and
they've trashed the new Netscape pretty universally. (I haven't tried the
Linux version, but I did try the Win32 version and it IS pretty bad).
Doesn't the future of Linux on the desktop depend, to some extent, on the
availability of a quality browser that keeps up with evolving standards? If
Netscape/Mozilla goes off the rails, isn't that ultimately going to be a
serious problem?
Mark
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: An apology (was GPL will die)
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 15:58:47 GMT
I would like to apologize for posting that message. Gary is right I
was in a foul mood last night and it was not my intention to insult
the folks dedicating their time and talent toward providing free or
low cost software to the community.
Accept my apology.
Steve
P.S And I do know where Iceland is on a map :)
Yet another stupid post by me.....
------------------------------
From: SamIam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: A few minutes of your time...
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 11:02:12 -0500
Mandrake 7.0 is a great place to start. I've tried several of the "GPL"
distros including Corel, SuSe, Caldera, Red Hat and I have found the
latest Mandrake to be not only the easiest to install and set up but it
also comes with the most apps (note: SuSe comes with the most apps in
the off-the-shelf distro). Corel seems to primarily directed at the
person coming from a Windows background, but I found it way too buggy.
I couldn't even get Kppp to work. If you want to try out a few, you can
order the free versions at cheapbytes.com or linuxmall.com. Or if you
get an off the shelf version definetly go with Mandrake 7.0 or SuSe
6.4. The only advantage of the Caldera or Corel versions is that they
come with the WordPerfect suite.
--Sam
Mark Cubberley wrote:
>
> I'm looking into Linux as a secondary OS for my PC laptop (I'm currently
> running Win 2000.) I have no experience with this OS, but I would like
> to!! I've looked around Linux-based web sites, but I'm looking for some
> opinions on a good Linux OS to start with...Linux-Mandrake perhaps? If
> you wouldn't mind taking a few minutes to point me in the right
> direction, give me your opinion, and help me get into this great OS, I'd
> really appreciate it.
>
> Thanks,
> Mark Cubberley
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wolfgang Weisselberg)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: 2000: Hammer blows to the Micro$oft machine!
Date: 11 Apr 2000 16:00:22 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 10 Apr 2000 00:35:15 GMT,
Christopher Browne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Bloody Viking would say:
> >The savings to business would be enormous. You could keep using the same
> >old hardware seemingly forever. But the upgrade-go-round is fuelled by the
> >file formats that are rendered incompatible with old versions of the
> >office app.
> Um. This can be nonsense as easily as not.
> StarOffice is bloated, requiring a goodly 32MB (hardly "using the same
> old hardware seemingly forever"), and as for file format, there's little
> guarantee that it won't change. Ditto for WordPerfect, ApplixWare,
> KDE Office, and GNOME's "office" software.
KDE Office is GPL, and so is 'GNOME's "office" software', IIRC.
Which is pretty much of a guarantee that it always will support
the older formats.
And with 64 MB becoming standard, you should be set for the next
years, unless a bug forces you to upgrade e.g. SO.
> The notion that "going Linux" inherently eliminates the "upgrade-go-round"
> is nonsense. Just watch the every-six-months new versions of SuSE and
> Red Hat Linux, and the move from LIBC5 to LIBC6.
Yes, and? We have a couple of happy servers running 2.0.38 on
libc5. You don't have to upgrade, unless you need to ... and
you can run libc5 and glibc2 (aka libc6) programs parallel on
one computer.
> You can live in a dreamworld where there's no change; that's not the one
> we live in...
Change does not usually happen in file formats. How old is
ASCII? And we STILL use that for most everything ... even for
emails and USENET and even HTML is written in ASCII.
-Wolfgang
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Kelley)
Subject: Re: Why so little discussion of the Netscape 6 preview on c.o.l.a?
Date: 11 Apr 2000 16:07:09 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 11 Apr 2000 15:39:26 GMT, Mark Weaver
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>There's been quite a bit of discussion in the Mac advocacy group, and
>they've trashed the new Netscape pretty universally. (I haven't tried the
>Linux version, but I did try the Win32 version and it IS pretty bad).
>Doesn't the future of Linux on the desktop depend, to some extent, on the
>availability of a quality browser that keeps up with evolving standards? If
>Netscape/Mozilla goes off the rails, isn't that ultimately going to be a
>serious problem?
>
>Mark
What exactly are they trashing? I have not tried the linux version
since I'm not using a glibc 2.1 distribution. I've heard it isn't
very good, but then it is still barely beta quality.
I don't see much point in discussing it at this point. I've tried the
win32 version and it certainly looks promising to me.
There's an article somewhere about IE 5.5, and how they're regressed
as far as standards are concerned. Typical MS, using IE5 as "bait" and
5.5 as the "switch".
Right now mozilla is the only major browser project dedicated to
conforming to the standards.
--
Tim Kelley
------------------------------
From: Jim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Backdoors in Windows 2000?
Date: 11 Apr 2000 12:11:37 EDT
In article <8cvf6o$l5v$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Christopher Smith"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:38f26cc4$2$yrgbherq$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jason Bowen) said:
> >
> > >Provide a link to them admitting to providing a backdoor for the
> government.
> >
> > Use your head.
>
> He is. Although right now he's bashing it against a brick wall.
>
> > There are a number of places that provide information on the keys. The
> keys
> > are there and it is not disputable. The only thing that can be disputed if
> > whether M$ did for M$, or for the government.
>
> The other thing that can be disputed is what the letters NSA as part of the
> name of a function call might stand for.
No Such Agency^H^H^H^H^H^HAPI?
--
Jim Naylor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 11 Apr 2000 10:21:47 -0600
"Nicholas Olsen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Ted Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > [snip about MacOS X]
> >
> > > The biggest shame right now is that Linux seems to copy either from bad
> unix
> > > examples or windows.
> > >
> > > I'd much rather see them cribbing from a better example, or even better,
> > > pushing past this and creating their own examples.
> >
> > That's funny... MacOS X is simply NeXT Step 2000. Apple is basing
> > their next-generation UI on a UNIX box.
> >
> > Take a look at http://www.gnustep.org :)
>
> And your point is..... NEXTSTEP was a good UNIX example. In terms of both
> the UI itself and the underlying display technology (display PostScript). I
> don't think there is or was another UI quite like it for a UNIX system,
> except maybe Quarz/Aqua (for obvious reasons). All the Linux GUIs are
> bloated, slow hacks poured on top of X-Windows, which itself sucks (IMO).
> NEXTSTEP was and Apple is really doing the right thing for UNIX GUIs if you
> ask me.
And it's available for Linux; so I don't understand your gripe.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kenneth P. Stox)
Crossposted-To:
comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.openbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc
Subject: Re: BSD & Linux
Date: 11 Apr 2000 16:23:23 GMT
In article <8cv4en$2cbhu$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rob Warnock) writes:
>
> But if you were a commercial site, a Unix source license [the only kind
> there was until ~1980] was (IIRC) $25k *per CPU*!!! And every couple of
> years it kept going up, and up, and up. IIRC, a Unix System III license
> was $125K. (I shudder to think how much SVr4 was.)
If memory serves correct, A V7 license was $16,000, a System V license ended
up over $100,000. System V.3 was the last straw for many, and hence the
formation of OSF.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
Subject: Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 11 Apr 2000 10:40:21 -0600
"John C. Randolph" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Gregory L. Hansen" wrote:
> >
> > In article <zxoI4.16641$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >In comp.sys.next.advocacy Gregory L. Hansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > >> I just had a thought. I've heard that BSD has a Linux compatibility
> > >> option.
> > >
> > >There is no current operating system called BSD Unix anymore. But yes,
> > >several of the BSD-derived systems like OpenBSD or FreeBSD can run
> > >Linux ELF binaries.
> > >
> > >> If MacOS X is based on BSD, does that mean MacOS X will also have
> > >> a BSD compatibility option?
> > >
> > >Given Darwin is Open Source, it is certainly doable to add ELF binary
> > >support to MacOS X and provide the hooks so that ldd looks for the
> > >Linux shared libs.
> >
> > Well, I'd almost say that would be the best of all possible worlds!
>
> Not quite. It's still UNIX.
>
> Check out www.eros-os.org for the right way to implement an OS.
"If you are a UNIX developer, you may be thinking at this point that
capabilities smell a lot like UNIX file descriptors. That is pretty
much correct, though capabilities do not have any state equivalent to
the current file offset. Once you get past the open call, the UNIX
file interface is essentially a capability interface for reasons of
performance."
That said, this stuff is neat. In the "Why aren't capabilities and
ACL's equivalent?" section of their FAQ, I can think of several UNIX
hacks to make it do what the capability system is doing, (thinking of
restricted ports running as normal users and such) -- but to be able
to do this without hacks seems like a good idea. Of course, many
things in computer science *seem* like good ideas until you actually
have to dedicate to using them.
Claming things like:
"In a capability system, both effects are contained. The user (or the
administrator) can define a restricted environment that mail programs
run within, and can thereby prevent such damage from occurring. The
mail transfer agent, for its part, runs with no special authority. It
has access to the user's mail files, and these can be compromised,
but it does not have access to anything else."
Is just silly (www.qmail.org).
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000: nothing worse
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 11 Apr 2000 10:47:39 -0600
"Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:uGxI4.5637$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > Bill Godfrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >
> > > > > > What happens if you lose the root password?
> > > > > Boot up with a floppy, change the password.
> > > > Wow, that is secure.
> > >
> >
> > Doesn't Windows 2000 have this same problem unless you use encryption?
>
> It's not near as simple. It involves locating the SAM, attempting to
> extract the passwords from it, hoping it isn't encrypted, and then
> hashing through them and hoping everything works.
... or you just boot up with the setup CD and re-install. When it
asks for the Administrator password you want, just type it in.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Subject: Re: GPL WILL die...Just a matter of time.......
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 11 Apr 2000 10:51:42 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> That was long before IPO////
>
> Wait and see what happens...It is happening already with binary
> drivers and no source provided.
>
> Tip of the iceberg but a firm start....
And we're supposed to be *impressed* with these shitty closed-source
drivers? As soon as the quality of Linux closed-source code gets up
to par with it's open-source, we'll talk.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xinix{$@esperi.demon.co.uk>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES
(or MDI for that matter)
Date: 11 Apr 2000 00:00:07 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Nix <$}xinix{$@esperi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > I think Java's attempt to reimplement `make' is annoying; it gets in the
> > way of tools like automake and brings no benefits that I can see; there
> > is no way to determine what .class files will result from compiling a
> > given .java file, and so on. Argh.
>
> Well, you can know that foobar.java will create foobar.class, but
> that's it.
No, you cannot. You need to parse the source and work out what classes
(including inner classes!) are defined therein. i.e., you need to be a
Java compiler, pretty much.
Snapshot versions of gcj support -MM properly (i.e. spit back the parsed
set of files it'll actually use)... but not a release version, yet.
(This is all clearly documented, but in fairly odd places, like the JVM
spec.)
> I prefer, once I've built the main architecture of a program, to have
> a makefile that specifies all dependencies explicitly. Maybe it's not
> perfect, but it sucks less than the alternatives that I've tried...
Specify `--include-deps' on the automake command line, and Makefile.in's
will be generated that will do just that. It tends to be extremely
irritating, though, because this includes system include files &c... so
I tend to just let dependency computation go its own way when doing a
`make dist'. It's safer, too, given the wild heterogeneity of Linux
boxes out there.
--
`ndbm on Linux is an emulation, not the original. It comes in several
flavours; `slightly broken', `moderately broken', and `totally and
utterly broken'.' --- Nick Kew
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xinix{$@esperi.demon.co.uk>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES
(or MDI for that matter)
Date: 11 Apr 2000 00:01:35 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Tim Haynes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [ "javac foo.java" always creates foo.class ]
> > You can? In my even brief encounters with java, I know that there is not
> > 100% correspondence between $f.java and $f.class; not to mention, nested
> > classes!
>
> This restriction is certainly enforced by the JDK javac; I've been
It is? Not any version I've used. Blackdown-1.2rc4 certainly does not
enforce that restriction.
--
`ndbm on Linux is an emulation, not the original. It comes in several
flavours; `slightly broken', `moderately broken', and `totally and
utterly broken'.' --- Nick Kew
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xinix{$@esperi.demon.co.uk>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: OT:RANT:Long: If anyone develops an IDE for Linux PLEASE NO PROJECT FILES
(or MDI for that matter)
Date: 11 Apr 2000 00:06:05 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) writes:
> Mind you, I did run into something weird in a development
> environment in NT, at one point. It turns out that
> GNU Make on NT uses CMD.EXE to fork off its commands.
1999-08-26 Rob Tulloh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* w32/subproc/sub_proc.c [WINDOWS32]: Added support for
HAVE_CYGWIN_SHELL. If you are using the Cygwin B20.1 release, it
is now possible to have have native support for this shell without
having to rely on klutzy BATCH_MODE_ONLY_SHELL.
* config.h.W32 [WINDOWS32]: Added HAVE_CYGWIN_SHELL macro which
users can define if they want to build make to use this shell.
* README.W32 [WINDOWS32]: Added informaton about
HAVE_CYGWIN_SHELL. Cleaned up text a bit to make it more current.
This went into make-3.78.
--
`ndbm on Linux is an emulation, not the original. It comes in several
flavours; `slightly broken', `moderately broken', and `totally and
utterly broken'.' --- Nick Kew
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xinix{$@esperi.demon.co.uk>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 11 Apr 2000 00:42:46 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nick Kew) writes:
> The Thing has an honourable tradition. The old icelandic Thing has a
> democratic tradition going back over 1000 years.
... and then they were conquered and lost it :( Sod.
> The Thing gave every citizen the right to speak *and be heard*. Can you
> imagine that in our modern so-called democracy?
Nope. Too many people.
--
`ndbm on Linux is an emulation, not the original. It comes in several
flavours; `slightly broken', `moderately broken', and `totally and
utterly broken'.' --- Nick Kew
------------------------------
From: Nix <$}xinix{$@esperi.demon.co.uk>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Introduction to Linux article for commentary
Date: 11 Apr 2000 00:45:45 +0100
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> In the US, ``communism'' is used interchangebly with ``socialism''.
> Since both are murderous and idiotic ideas, the distinction is not
> terribly important to us.
Classical Marxist socialism was merely idiotic --- it assumed that
humans were all rational entities capable of reasoning on an
individual-by-individual basis about entire societies, which is clearly
incorrect.
Communism, *especially* that once practiced in the USSR, *is* murderous
as well. (Now they seem to have some sort of corrupta oligarchy/
plutocracy in .ru, which is pretty bad too. I can't say which is
worse... I'd have to leave that to someone who was there.)
--
`ndbm on Linux is an emulation, not the original. It comes in several
flavours; `slightly broken', `moderately broken', and `totally and
utterly broken'.' --- Nick Kew
------------------------------
From: "Chuck Swiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 17:04:09 GMT
In comp.sys.next.advocacy John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>: Also, from a more practical standpoint...I would be very surprised if
>: Oracle 8i for Linux actually worked properly under the FreeBSD
>: Linux-binary-support layer.
>
> FWIW, I happened across this just today:
>
> "How to run Oracle for Linux on FreeBSD"
>
> http://www.scc.nl/~marcel/howto-oracle.html
Nifty, although you have to do a fair amount of fiddling to get
it working. Wonder how well this works under load?
-Chuck
Chuck 'Sisyphus' Swiger | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Bad cop! No Donut.
------------------------+-------------------+--------------------
I know that you are an optimist if you think I am a pessimist....
------------------------------
From: "Chuck Swiger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Looking forward to Apple's MacOX X
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.next.advocacy
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 17:08:55 GMT
In comp.sys.next.advocacy Sascha Bohnenkamp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Given Darwin is Open Source, it is certainly doable to add ELF binary
>> support to MacOS X and provide the hooks so that ldd looks for the
>> Linux shared libs.
>
> Darwin != MacOSX
True; Darwin is (or will be, since MacOS X has not been released yet) an
approximate subset of MacOS X.
Since one of the purposes for Darwin's existence is to permit people
to make changes like adding new filesystem or executable binary
support to the Darwin kernel and be able to drop your customized
kernel in place of the kernel Apple ships with MacOS X, adding ELF
support to MacOS X is also entirely feasible.
-Chuck
Chuck 'Sisyphus' Swiger | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Bad cop! No Donut.
------------------------+-------------------+--------------------
I know that you are an optimist if you think I am a pessimist....
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
