Linux-Advocacy Digest #659, Volume #26 Wed, 24 May 00 07:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. (Bloody Viking)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (jordan4@nowhere)
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. (2:1)
Re: Who is "S"?? (2:1)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Richard Steiner)
Re: Vote on your favorite distribution at this poll (Oystein Viggen)
Re: Time to prove it's not just words (Yannick)
Re: Time to prove it's not just words (Yannick)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Slashdot is down (Donal K. Fellows)
Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals. (Full Name)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Full Name)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Maciej Golebiewski)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 07:29:06 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> If you had any experience in the area to speak of you would be
> able to answer your own question to the negative.
No, no experience at all. Really. I only worked with Digital Unix for a few
years.
> Whereas there
> are some permissive X servers (like Exceed on NT), Xfree doesn't
> tend to let you connect an xclient from any old host to your
> local display.
Doesn't tend to? Can it be configured to allow it? What's the default - I
hope it's no access at all.
Of course, because I have no experience in this area, is it still possible
take control of another terminal without someone else knowing. And can you
use this to grab passwords, I wonder?
Of course I have no idea what I'm talking about. NOT!
B^>
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 07:36:54 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Actually, there are still segment limitations in Win32.
> Banging up against them while doing QA against Win95
> was what finally got me to dump Windows entirely.
With WIN32 there are no segment limitations. You're talking about Windows
9x, which is WIN32 at the top but with WIN16 underneath. It's a ghastly
process called 'thunking' to convert between 32 bit flat model addressing
and the segmented addressing of 16 bit.
Windows NT/2000 uses WIN32 throughout the system, unlike WIN9x. WIN16 is
implemented with WOW (Windows on Windows) converting to 32 bit, as opposed
to the other way around.
Pete
------------------------------
From: Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 07:48:04 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Ray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: It's called the "Staircase Effect". Check out section 7.2 of The Linux
: Printing HOWTO.
I didn't know there was a name for this "staircase effect". I just figured
that my printer was brain-dead.
--
CAUTION: Email Spam Killer in use. Leave this line in your reply! 152680
First Law of Economics: You can't sell product to people without money.
4968238 bytes of spam mail deleted. http://www.wwa.com/~nospam/
------------------------------
From: jordan4@nowhere
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 24 May 2000 00:47:41 -0700
In article <8gftau$6s8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Peter says...
>
peter, your whole approach to this is an indicatiion that you
have seem to never have worked in a professional software
engineering company.
Find any well known software organization, and you will find
them using bug tracking system to help manage their software
process.
You can argue all you want, at the end of the day, a bug
tracking system is a well proven process to help produce
better software. Just becuase you do not understand it,
is an indication of your level of expeirence in software
engineering.
Engineering is all about processes. Well defined processes.
A bug tracking system is one process among many to help
produce a better software system.
Another is testing, and having a well developed test cases
and regression test system that is well documented and
automated as much as possible. This process is also very
much a sloppy process in Linux kernel.
There are many aspects to software engineering other than just
coding and shooting an email message to someone. Programmers
must start to learn to approach software development more
as as science and as an engineering practise.
I would care less if Linux ever gets a bug tracking system or
not. It will only hurt linux in the long term. If that is what
Linux kernel programmers want, so be it.
jo.
>In comp.os.linux.misc s@- wrote:
>: In article <8gfhoj$3dt$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Peter says...
>:>In comp.os.linux.misc John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>:>: How much sooner might those bugs have been fixed given a decent bug
>:>: tracking system?
>
>:>None for the interesting bugs. Report an interesting bug,
>
>: report? report?? How ?? That is the whole point of a bug tracking
>: system you moron, it is to HELP people know how to report bugs.
>
>Tut tut. Who are you?
>
>If you can't read the README in the kernel directory, or the BUG-HUNTING
>document in the Document subdirectory, you're ot up to reading the www
>page. And then there is the MAINTAINERS file.
>
>Now please go read the instructions ...
>
>: Not only that, there should be a defined way of what information
>: to report to help the developer. The bug tracking system
>
>Oh, there is, there is.
>
>: can ask for the correct information that might help the developer,
>: instead of sending email saying 'hello, kernel just hanged, why??'
>
>They will be shot.
>
>:>Boring bugs indeed will be forgotten.
>
>: The will be forgetten becuase there is no bug tracking system.
>
>No, they'll be forgotten because they're boring. Nobody's being paid to
>fix your boring bugs. You do it.
>
>: and no bug is boring. a bug is a bug. and how is to judge a
>: bug is 'boring' ?
>
>I have no trouble. Believe me. Busy developers have even less trouble.
>
>:>: with sound: sending anything to /dev/dsp hangs the SCSI driver. If there
>
>:>I believe that's known.
>
>: If there is a bug tracking system you do not have to guess. A user
>: can simply check, and find out right away.
>
>I'm not guessing. And no, they can't find out. Apparantly you're an
>idiot .. because you don't understand that a bug is not readily
>identifiable from a bug report. (I just checked debians list for
>a longstanding ifconfig/kernel bug that we have been working on with
>L-K, and its not clear if it has been identified previously or not - I
>think not, but the reports aren't clear enough to tell).
>
>If I really want to be sure I'll ask the author implicated.
>
>:>I've seen several threads go past on the scsi
>:>problem in 2.3.99 and above. Doug's working on it. Ask him!
>
>: who is Doug?? why would I care as user who is working on what? I simply
>: found a problem in Linux and I want to report it.
>
>Doug's the author and maintainer for the scsi driver you mentioned.
>Look at the source. There's his name and address. Look at the
>MAINTAINERS list, read linux-kernel ...
>
>:>EH? Why don't you mail the maintainer? That's debian practice too!
>
>: A bug tracking system will automatically do that for you. send automated
>: email to the developer(s) working on that part of the kernel.
>
>There's no need to. You can mail him directly. Cc the general kernel
>list or the more specific linux-scsi list.
>
>:>As you know, you might get Alan's interest on that one too. But 2.3.99
>:>has hundreds of bugs like that
>
>: Where is the list? without an official bug tracking system, this is
>: a very sloppy way of developing software.
>
>The list of things that WORK would be smaller! The big flap for the
>last 3 months has bee trying to get the memory balancing working enough
>to let people run dd. A slight exaggeration, but that's the gist.
>
>:> so it's not high priority yet. Make sure at least Doug knows about it.
>
>: Doug who?
>
>I'm sorry, my post was not addressed to you, as you can see from your
>quotes. I addressed John, who is a debian maintainer, and who
>knows who Doug is. Even if he didn't (which is very unlikely), he'd
>be able to find out, because he can read the MAINTAINERS file and the
>attributions in the source even if he couldn't avail himself of debians
>own bugtrack system which points back to the upstream maintainer.
>
>Are you honestly blind and deaf to the unending traffic on the kernel
>lists? I've received about a hundred mails in the last three hours.
>Possibly. What you are saying is that if you don't look, you don't see,
>AND that ordinary users don't know how to look, so they don't see. Your
>solution is an advertising gimmick - face it. It's a publicity stunt.
>
>Nobody would actually mind having a bugtrack system. It just wouldn't
>work. Communication via the lists and email is much faster and more
>effective. THere are very few people capable of detecting a kernel
>bug, and new bugs in stable releases are well below the communication
>saturation rate for the kerel developers forums. Say three a week.
>So the bottleneck that a bugtrack system seeks to resolve or impose
>just isn't relevant.
>
>If you think you have a bug, report it to the appropriate lists or to
>the maintainer. Most drivers have their own mail lists and web pages,
>but generic areas of the kernel also have their own lists (such as
>linux-mm and linux-fs and linux-scsi and ...). There's a linux system
>newsgroup nextdoor too! Linus reads that.
>
>Peter
------------------------------
From: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 09:38:05 +0100
Bloody Viking wrote:
>
> When printing with LPR the Linux test.txt file, I get.... THIS!
>
> 1
> 2
> 3
> 4
> 5
> test of printer.
>
> Obviously I have one brain-dead printer! Even funnier, before I fired up
> that cheque-cut-ware, any attempt to print from Linux just resulted in
> formfeeding a blank page!
>
It's more of a brain-dead industry than a brain-dead printer. It all
dates back to typewriters and teletypes. You can easily configure the
printer to output a CR/LF pair on an LF.
I can't remember now, but another poster did.
-Ed
--
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: 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Who is "S"??
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 09:41:29 +0100
"Colin R. Day" wrote:
>
> 2:1 wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > Things like
> > FD 100
> > RT 90
> > FD 100
> > RT 90
> > BK 50
> >
> > To draw:
> >
> > __|
> > |
> > |
> > A
> >
> > (A is the starting posn of the turtle) You just give it commands like
> > forward, backwards, turn. There is some provision vor variables, but I
> > don't know about loops.
>
> <snip>
>
> There are for and while entries in my /sur/share/logo/logolib directory.
Is that with BSD logo (or whatever it's calles, the one from UCB
anyway)?
>
> Colin Day
I'm talking about a 20-year old version on an 8bit micro. I don't ever
remember doing loops (junior school at the time), but mabey that's just
me.
Long live LOGO!
-Ed
--
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: "Peter T. Breuer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 24 May 2000 08:40:03 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc jordan4@nowhere wrote:
: In article <8gftau$6s8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Peter says...
:>
: peter, your whole approach to this is an indicatiion that you
: have seem to never have worked in a professional software
: engineering company.
I should hope not! On the other hand, I have worked WITH a professional
SE company many a time. You will find my code in use worldwide. Hey,
it's holding up the southern europe interbanking system!
: Find any well known software organization, and you will find
: them using bug tracking system to help manage their software
: process.
Uh, no you won't. I can guarantee you that 90% of all SE companies
haven't heard of sccs, rcs, cvs or a mountain of other project
management software. Where do you get your stuffy view of the world
from? Are you working for some team of electricians?
: You can argue all you want, at the end of the day, a bug
: tracking system is a well proven process to help produce
: better software. Just becuase you do not understand it,
Tell me, do you use bugtracking for your own personal software projects?
How many do you have, anyway?
: is an indication of your level of expeirence in software
: engineering.
:-).
Oh, I see. And what is your view on the lack of a formal specification
for any of this. How are you proposing that people do all this
development without even the slightest idea ofithout any way of knowing
if they are doing iit right? ANd how can they test it if they don't know
what it is supposed to do?
: Engineering is all about processes. Well defined processes.
Oh, it's a little bit about processes. Unfortunately
for you, building a kernel is not yet a standard engineering process.
Processes produce products not innovations. The kernel is evolving
towards a product and a process, but its not anywhere near a canned
product yet. It's built by hand, even the assembler is sometimes
written by humans.
: A bug tracking system is one process among many to help
: produce a better software system.
Only if you don't already have something better.
: Another is testing, and having a well developed test cases
: and regression test system that is well documented and
: automated as much as possible. This process is also very
: much a sloppy process in Linux kernel.
I'll stop laughing soon.
Nobody will mind if you set up a bugtrack system. Sure, collect bug
reports and forward them to the maintainer. Please do. Have you worked
out by now that your system amounts to "mail the maintainer"?
: There are many aspects to software engineering other than just
: coding and shooting an email message to someone. Programmers
: must start to learn to approach software development more
: as as science and as an engineering practise.
: I would care less if Linux ever gets a bug tracking system or
Would or couldn't? The sentence doesn't make sense.
: not. It will only hurt linux in the long term. If that is what
: Linux kernel programmers want, so be it.
Peter
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Steiner)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 03:36:30 -0500
Here in comp.os.linux.misc, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
spake unto us, saying:
>Rich Steiner writes:
>
>> The current system seems to work well.
>
>How do you know? How many useful bug reports are not being filed?
The real measure is how well the software is working, IMO, and I think
the kernel in general does very well given its "release early release
often" methodology.
In any case, it certainly can't hurt to suggest a bug-tracking package
if you know of one that might be useful. But I would suggest tracking
down the appropriate kernel mailing list and making the suggestion
there, not here. This is a general newsgroup mainly for end-users.
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>---> Bloomington, MN
OS/2 + BeOS + Linux + Solaris + Win95 + WinNT4 + FreeBSD + DOS
+ VMWare + Fusion + vMac + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
In the words of the car dealers, "they all do that".
------------------------------
From: Oystein Viggen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.caldera,alt.os.linux.corel,alt.os.linux.slackware,alt.os.linux.turbolinux,alt.uu.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Vote on your favorite distribution at this poll
Date: 24 May 2000 12:07:39 +0200
"Nick" spake thus:
> +-------------------------------------------+
> |Which Dist? |
> |-------------------------------------------|
At least not fscking windows used to generate this fscking
html-posting.
Begone foul demon!
Oystein
------------------------------
From: Yannick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Time to prove it's not just words
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 10:09:08 GMT
In article <8gfbef$crl$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Of course if you really want NT-like permissions, then you should go
> > for ACL's. There are patches (for the kernel and file system utils)
> > at http://acl.bestbits.at/ for ACL support.
>
> And if you poke around in NT, there is (used to be) a command called
> something like "setacls". With no options will show the access
control
> lists for NT objects in a very *NIX-like way. I actually preferred it
> over the point-and-click approach because I could do mass changes with
> just a few lines in a script. No trivial matter when you have
thousands
> of users. Hope MSFT haven't taken that away....
Ever had a look at cacls and xcacls ? That's what you want. NT-like,
too.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: Yannick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Time to prove it's not just words
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 10:07:21 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote:
> On Tue, 23 May 2000 20:28:27 GMT, Yannick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >
> >Damien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message :
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> On Mon, 22 May 2000 20:50:08 GMT, in alt.destroy.microsoft,
> >> Yannick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [deletia]
> >> The easiest way is to create a group for each resource. Then you
> >> could modify your new user scripts to add all new users to all the
> >> groups. Then if you want to deny a paticular user a paticular
> >> resource, just remove them from that group.
> >>
> >Which means the system does nothing and the admin everything
> >(writing scripts).
> >
> >I don't find this to be a good idea. The _concept_ of having one
> >user group per resource is stupid. (I don't say your solution is
> >stupid, because it seems as if it's the only one). But the concept
> >itself is just plain stupid.
>
> Why? Presumably you're interested in an ACL for each shared
> resource. A group is just another level of indirection.
>
No. NT's security logic is that you have people (users), which, as
member of a particular organisation, or assuming a particular function
(i.e. belonging to a group), have access to some resources.
There are several problems to that group thing :
* If you, as normal user, want to deny access to a resource of yours,
you cannot do this on a per-user basis since all your choice will be to
prevent your 'resource group' from accessing it.
* If you, as normal user, want to grant access to a resource of yours,
you will not be able to do this, be it on a per-user or per-group
basis, unless you ask your admin to create you the 'resource group' for
it.
* Besides, if you have 500 different resources, you will have 500
different resource groups. If you have 3000 different resources.....
In short, you will slow down the system in an amount proportional to
the number of resources, and also influenced by the number of system.
The NT ACL system may be slightly slower for each access, but not be
very influenced (maybe not at all) by the number of users or resources.
The resource group is not a solution, it's a workaround of a design
flaw. The design flaw which probably wasn't a flaw in its original
context (i.e. slow processors, few resources available, etc...).
Yannick.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 21:30:38 -0400
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> DOS and Windows are OS's. They're not applications.
>>
>> Windows cannot run without DOS, thus Windows and DOS are joined.
By this reasoning no DOS based application program can run without DOS --
which means they are joined to DOS, ... and extending this premise to its
logical conclusion, one can only conclude that Microsoft is a monopoly and
illegal under US law. -- You should really be getting big bucks from M$ for
this impossible job that makes you look as dumb as Gates rocking back in forth
in his chair when being asked questions.
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 20:36:59 -0400
Mark Robinson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>>>>
>>>>> Appeal courts should not be looking at past decisions of
>>>>> judges to decide whether to overturn.
>>>>
>>>> Yeah. We wouldn't want them setting a "prescedent" for such actions
>>>> of looking back on former cases, now would we?
>>
>>>No, they should evaluate based on merit decided on a case-by-case basis.
>>
>> If this is what you want, you shouldn't be living here. Law doesn't work
>> this way, never has, never will.
>>
>That's why I don't. Using a decision made a judge in the past to decide on a
>different decision is is very stupid. Luckily the real world doesn't look
>like that.
The stupid thing is your thinking. ALL of society, including law is based on
what has transpired before to settle the pricipals by which we live. And the
world **does not** like your lets play pretend and make it the way we want it
fantasy.
===========================================================
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
===========================================================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows)
Subject: Re: Slashdot is down
Date: 24 May 2000 10:21:32 GMT
In article <nooof8.mf6.ln@twirl>, Geoff Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Microsoft doesn't have to present massivly dynamic content
>> either, it's mostly a reference site.
> You have to wonder why they use ASP for almost every page then don't you :-)
Isn't that so they can try to defeat web caches, allowing them to get
an "accurate" count of the number of people visiting the site? The
fact that this slows down access by quite a lot for some people
obviously doesn't matter...
Donal.
--
Donal K. Fellows http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~fellowsd/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- I may seem more arrogant, but I think that's just because you didn't
realize how arrogant I was before. :^)
-- Jeffrey Hobbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Full Name)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft W2K lack of goals.
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 10:41:00 GMT
On Tue, 23 May 2000 21:09:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
() wrote:
>>
>> If you had any experience in the area to speak of you would be
>> able to answer your own question to the negative. Whereas there
>> are some permissive X servers (like Exceed on NT), Xfree doesn't
>> tend to let you connect an xclient from any old host to your
>> local display.
>>
>
>The security problem is that if you let machine X write to your display,
>then any user on machine X can.
>
>DEC had a workaround where you entered both the machine name and userid
>into the xhost command.
>
Yes, Unix more or less works on machine based security. This was OK
20 years ago but is problematic in a modern computing environment.
If someone breaks one Unix box on a network they will shortly have
access to a great deal of resources on other Unix machines on the same
network.
People in this group complain about NT security. However if you
examine the way people try to attack NT systems it is almost always
from a Unix machine using something like Samba.
Earlier this year there was an attack on a machine on a neighbouring
network to the where I work. The source was apparently an IP address
on our subnet. The machine owning the IP address turned out to be an
NT workstation in a secure location. We immediately dismissed it as
some sort of IP spoofing.
However had the source machine been a Unix box we would have
immediately taken it offline and given a thorough examination.
Unix is an ideal platform from which to launch security attacks. NT
is not.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Full Name)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 10:53:05 GMT
Any serious administrator who reads this thread would have to discard
Linux as a bad joke.
The more I read the more I believe Linux advocates are nothing more
than children who have found a new toy to play with.
On 22 May 2000 03:26:53 -0700, steve@howdy wrote:
>
>any one can give a link or have information on how can one
>enter a bug report if they find a problem in the linux OS?
>
>Is there an official site setup so one can do that? if not,
>how does one report a bug in linux? is it distro specific?
>I see rhat have a bug report page
>
>http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/
>
>But if one has a bug in kernel, is that the place to
>report it? btw, I did not see such a thing on Suse web site.
>
>looking at http://www.kernel.org I did not see a place
>to report a bug.
>
>I think there should be one place to report bugs for linux. The
>way it is now seem confusing. How do people enter bug reports
>against other OS's such as windows? (not a window user so I do
>not know).
>
>regards,
>steve
>
------------------------------
From: Maciej Golebiewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.development.system,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 12:58:20 +0200
David Steuber wrote:
> Do people really have trouble with ./configure, make, make install?
> It has _never_ been a problem for me. Maybe I am just lucky. Even
> though I changed my compiler, libc, and libtools.
How often the makefiles provide the "uninstall" target, too? Or at least
a script for un-installing? Otherwise, over the time and number of upgrades
to newer versions comprised of different files, you're accumulating
"abandoned"
files.
RPM is not perfect but it is quite OK. It's just that the guys creating rpm
not always can get the dependencies right. Personally one of my favourite
query options in rpm is -q -f to instantly get the name of the package
"owning" a specific file. I love it.
Maciej
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
