Linux-Advocacy Digest #675, Volume #26 Thu, 25 May 00 02:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Font deuglification ?? ("Jim Ross")
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. (Bloody Viking)
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. (Bloody Viking)
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. (Bloody Viking)
Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: how to configure corel linux boot to GUI? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: how to configure corel linux boot to GUI? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save
It?) (WickedDyno)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux ("Peter T. Breuer")
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (David Steuber)
Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software (Joseph)
Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ? (Thomas Phipps)
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Leslie Mikesell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Jim Ross" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Font deuglification ??
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 23:56:36 -0400
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> And you never will find it. Linux looks ugly and like shit comapred to
> Windows.
>
> It is the dirty ugly secret, among others, of Linux.
>
> Do your eyes a favor and run an operating system that at least looks
> decent.
>
> I would suggest Mac.
Yes yes yes.
That's the secret I find the most annoying.
I hear X might have anti-aliased font by 2002.
Jim Ross
------------------------------
From: Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 04:12:54 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
: You have a brain dead operating system, not a brain dead printer.
: Linux is braindead.
: Your printer works fine under Windows...
Nope, the printer is brain-dead... just like you. You remind me of a
Winmodem. That is, anyone talking to you has to think for you too, just as
the Windows computer must waste CPU cycles to use the Winmodem. In other
words, you have a Winbrain. Which is to say you are as brain-dead as a
Windevice.
--
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: Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 04:15:49 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Leslie Mikesell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: That's known as ghostscript, and is probably included with your
: Linux distribution. RedHat gives you a nice fill-out-the-form
: setup. With other systems you may have to glue the filter
: commands into the printcap file yourself.
Can you use Ghostscript from the command line? (provided of course you
have a Poscript file to print) I never tried Ghostscript as so far I never
had to print a Postscript file.
--
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: Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 04:19:24 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy JEDIDIAH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: On Thu, 25 May 2000 02:33:39 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
:wrote:
:>You have a brain dead operating system, not a brain dead printer.
:>Linux is braindead.
:>Your printer works fine under Windows...
: No, the printer is acting as if DOS is the only OS on the
: face of the planet. It is not. It would have the same
: problem with a machine that's even 'superior' by your
: own standards (if you were sincere about them): the Macintosh.
The person you replied to, as you can see, has the IQ of a Winmodem. With
a crack in the card.
--
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: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ?
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 04:32:37 GMT
On Thu, 25 May 2000 03:30:09 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Thu, 25 May 2000 02:28:24 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>It's amazing how twisted the folks around here are. Linux is a stone
>>age system that quite frankly the public at large, at least in the
>>USA, has ignored and continues to ignore.
>
> That's rather perverse considering the one that has the
> CP/M & DOS heritage. There's nothing 'stone age' about
> Unix except for the fact that Win/DOS was in the stone
> age when Unix was running on hardware comparable to
> current machines.
And DOS advanced and UNIX stayed put right in the stone age where it
belongs. Oh yea BTW Linux is NOT Unix. Linux is Linux and it sucks.
Don't try and compare it to REAL Unix, please.
>>
>>Think about it. Person goes into CompUSA with $100 and is confronted
>>with Windows for $89.00 and Linux for $29.00 or better yet for free.
>>Yet they go for Windows every time based on market share.
>>
>>They can't even GIVE LINUX AWAY!!!!
>
> Those that track such numbers seem to think that Linux
> is doing quite well for itself in terms of sales.
Sure they do. When they sell 10 copies of Linux in April and 20 copies
in May you have a 100 percent increse. Get real already. Linux has not
even made a chink in Windows armour.
>[deletia]
>
> How far into the 21st century will it be before DOS is finally
> killed off once and for all?
Can't tell you. I don't run DOS. But Linux will be dead in 2 years or
so. Unix will survive, but Linux will be dead.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Fun with Brain Dead Printers.
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 04:34:24 GMT
Fucking idiot. The guy's printer works under the most popular OS on
the planet, you expect it to work under a ner-do-well piece of shit OS
like Linux?
Give me a break....
Stop crying sour grapes just because your choice of OSen is at the
bottum of the list for hardware manufacturers...
On Thu, 25 May 2000 03:31:26 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Thu, 25 May 2000 02:33:39 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>You have a brain dead operating system, not a brain dead printer.
>>
>>Linux is braindead.
>>
>>
>>Your printer works fine under Windows...
>
> No, the printer is acting as if DOS is the only OS on the
> face of the planet. It is not. It would have the same
> problem with a machine that's even 'superior' by your
> own standards (if you were sincere about them): the Macintosh.
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Wed, 24 May 2000 05:14:05 GMT, Bloody Viking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>I got a new black and white cartridge for an NEC Superscript 150C today. I
>>>also bought some (Winblows) cheque-cutting software. So, I installed the
>>>cheque-cut-ware in Winblows, and started playing with the printer. OK, in
>>>Winblows it works fine, and it will manufacture cheques. (cut checks)
>>>
>>>Next, I played with QBASIC and the printer again works fine.
>>>
>>>Now, the fun part. In DOS, I made a test text file (test.txt) and booted
>>>up Linux. Using good old LPR to print with, I got this output:
>>>
>>>Printing the DOS file in Linux, I get this:
>>>
>>>
>>>2
>>>3
>>>4
>>>5
>>>
>>>testing printer.
>>>
>>>Note that the DOS file has a 1 at the start which was not printed.
>>>
>>>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!
>>>
>>>I guess I'll have to play around with C like how I once played around with
>>>a Commodore's BASIC to hack a printer, like to find the graphics character
>>>whereby the next byte is printed as binary with the ons and offs to make
>>>graphics.
>>>
>>>What does DOS use as a newline? Certainly not what UNIX uses as a newline
>>>character in the original binary. I guess since I don't have money to
>>>blow, I'll have to make this near-paperweight of a printer work.
>>>
>>>Don't you just love brain-dead printers?
>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: how to configure corel linux boot to GUI?
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 04:36:03 GMT
On Thu, 25 May 2000 03:33:34 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Thu, 25 May 2000 02:32:15 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>>And if it's not documented you are screwed...Typical Linoshit..Read
>
> That's true of things in general. My peeve for the week
> is the ICL file format.
I don't know what ICl is so I can't comment.
>>this read that read everything to accomplish which would normally be
>>an easy task.
>
> This is rather Odd considering that you would have to go
> through the same sort of process to do the same sort of
> thing under WinDOS.
Nope.. Plugin the card and fire up the diskette that came with it.
Chances are 99.9999 percent it will work under WIndows/Dos. Linux?
Good luck....
Don't see Linux mentioned on the outside of the box do you?
>>
>>Linux is a waste of time.
>>
>>
>>On 24 May 2000 07:08:02 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marada C.
>>Shradrakaii) wrote:
>>
>>>>did any body know how to install corel linux to boot to GUI. When ever
>>>>i install corel linux, it boot to console every time. i try to
>>>>reinstall the corel linux, same problem appear.
>>>>
>>>>Can somebody help me PLEASSSSSSSSE, thanks.
>>>
>>>Look at the file /etc/inittab.
>>>
>>>If you're lucky, it's documented. There should be a line saying something like
>>>
>>>id:3:initdefault
>>>
>>>(It may be punctuated slightly differently, and the number may vary)
>>>
>>>The file may indicate which runlevel number starts X automatically (look for
>>>words like X or xdm or kdm), and replace the number in the 'initdefault' line
>>>(the '3' in my example) with its number.
>>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: how to configure corel linux boot to GUI?
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 04:37:28 GMT
On Thu, 25 May 2000 00:04:27 -0400, "Rich C"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> And if it's not documented you are screwed...Typical Linoshit..Read
>> this read that read everything to accomplish which would normally be
>> an easy task.
>>
>> Linux is a waste of time.
>>
>Oh, and your presence in this ng isn't a waste of time? (yours AND ours.)
>
>If YOU spent half as much time learning Linux as you spend trashing it in
>this ng, you would have a smooth running, highly tweaked system that would
>be the envy of most Linux users; you would be praising Linux for the stable,
>efficient, technically superior operating system that it is; and, best of
>all, people would actually RESPECT your opinions.
For what? To run half assed applications that are not even close to
their WIndows counterparts? I think not....
>The init level for booting to X by default is 5. Change the 3 to a 5 in your
>/etc/inittab file, but ONLY after you have made sure you have a stable X
>configuration. Otherwise, you won't be able to do anything if you boot to X
>automatically, and X doesn't work for some reason. (Most distros, however,
>have a utility enabled (I forget what the name is) that will stop a process
>that restarts too fast or too often for a period of time (usually 5 minutes)
>so it doesn't tie up the system dying and restarting.)
More LinoSpeak to make things even more confused than they already
are....
snip]
------------------------------
From: WickedDyno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (was Re: Would a M$ Voluntary
Split Save It?)
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 00:45:09 -0400
In article <fretwiz-9BFCA1.18393724052000@[24.14.77.5]>, fretwiz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, EdWIN
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> In article <53YW4.10754$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >Mayor writes:
>> >
>> >>>>> Christopher Smith writes:
>> >
>> >>>>>>>> We sic Tholen onto you.
>> >
>> >>>>>>> Who is "we"?
>> >
>> >>>>>> We is us.
>> >
>> >>>>> Who is "us"?
>> >
>> >>>> Us is "we", obviously.
>> >
>> >>> Classic circular reasoning.
>> >
>> >> If A=B does not B=A?
>> >
>> >Typical inappropriate analogy.
>>
>> Incorrect.
>>
>> >I was doing the equivalent of asking for the value of A.
>>
>> You're erroneously presupposed the existence of "A."
>>
>> >Your response does nothing to provide me with that
>> >value.
>>
>> Unnecessary. Meanwhile, where is your logical argument? Why,
>> nowhere to be seen!
>>
>
>Why continue to pretend you could recognize a logical agrument?
Typical invective. Meanwhile, where is your logical "agrument"? Why,
nowhere to be seen!
--
| Andrew Glasgow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |
| SCSI is *NOT* magic. There are *fundamental technical |
| reasons* why it is necessary to sacrifice a young goat |
| to your SCSI chain now and then. -- John Woods |
------------------------------
From: "Peter T. Breuer" <[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: 25 May 2000 04:54:09 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Sure, you can replicate the functionality in RPM or Deb easily enough, but
: not with just the ./configure;make;make install mentioned. (At least not
: without the connivence of the writer of the ./configure script.) RPM allready
setenv INSTALL "pkginstall install -c"
(and thus log what goes where)
Peter
------------------------------
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
From: David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 04:59:58 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David T. Blake) writes:
' No, they are ensuring they can continue a revenue stream based
' on contributions from outside the company. They will take your
' modification and include it in QT Pro.
Ok, they _do_ get to stick your extension of Qt back into their code.
I see what you are getting at now.
However, others have equal right to your extension. Well, not quite
equal. Only Qt gets to charge for it in the pro ed.
' > As I said previously, if you don't like the Qt license, you can
' > create your own library. There is no one to stop you. You can
' > also use one of the other available libraries.
'
' I was not arguing I should create a library. I was not arguing
' against QTs right to use whatever license they like. I was
' arguing that people should think twice before referring to QT
' licensing as substantially free or "open source". The right to
' fork is absent, the right not to have your contributions included
' in proprietary works (such as QT Pro) is gone, and QT gets a copy
' of EVERYTHING that even links to their code, even if it is not
' publicly available.
I see what you are saying now, I think. Mind you, you loose any such
rights if you use GPL code as well, so there is also the same
consideration with that license.
As for code that is not publicly available, ie an internal app, Qt and
the rest of the world will never know about it. However, this is a
bit of a grey area in my mind. If Troll found out about the code and
asked for it, what then? Deny everything?
Maybe the Harmony project will settle this last concern. That all
depends if Harmony is LGPL or GPL.
--
David Steuber | Hi! My name is David Steuber, and I am
NRA Member | a hoploholic.
All bits are significant. Some bits are more significant than others.
-- Charles Babbage Orwell
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 24 May 2000 22:07:57 -0400
From: Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why only Microsoft should be allowed to create software
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Thu, 25 May 2000 01:20:06 GMT, Marty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Except for the minor problem(which I spelled out above) that:
>
> To *get* the damned fixpack you've got to get to IBM's WWW site. To
> get there, you need a modern browser,
Like Netscape 2.02 or you can FTP into a public FTP server directly.
> because I had horrendous errors
> and "Type .NSF isn't known; save to disk?" errors when I tried with
> WebExplorer 1.2 (which IBM includes). However, to get that modern
> browser (Netscape 4.61, which I could navigate to on IBM's WWW site,
> after 5 minutes of searching - grumble)
ha ha. It took you five minutes ha ha. The OS/2 default desktop is
setup with a link to the netscape browser. But it gets even funnier.
Search ALL of IBM http://www.ibm.com with these three words "OS/2 warp
netscape" You get these two top hits:
1) Netscape Communicator 4.61 for OS/2 Warp
IBM OS/2 Netscape Download Page
2) IBM OS/2: Netscape Communicator 4.04 for OS/2 Warp
IBM OS/2: Netscape Communicator 4.04 for OS/2 Warp
If it also took you 5 minutes to find your way out of a closet - who
would you blame for that problem?
> you need FixPack 5. However,
> to get FixPack 5, you need to be able to navigate on IBM's WWW site.
>
> Basically, if you have FP13 on a CDROM or locally, or know how to find
> it on an FTP site, you're fine.
Basically it is Very easy to find the FTP site - even when searhcing
from the main IBM web page - You click on the URL and use the FTP site
link. Or type it in.
ftp://ftp.software.ibm.com/ps/products/os2/fixes/v4warp/english-us/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Phipps)
Subject: Re: Advocacy or Mental Illness ?
Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 05:13:38 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[sniped to protect the innocent]
>>
>> How far into the 21st century will it be before DOS is finally
>> killed off once and for all?
>
>
>Can't tell you. I don't run DOS. But Linux will be dead in 2 years or
>so. Unix will survive, but Linux will be dead.
thats what they said 2 years ago ... and 2 years before that,
some how I doubt that it will be dead in two years ..
WhyteWolf
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 25 May 2000 00:15:15 -0500
In article <8ghmmi$ncg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Peter T. Breuer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>:>They wouldn't know a bug if it bit them in the nose and deleted every file
>:>whose name ends in "e".
>
>: Beg your pardon? Do you think no one cared about the e2fs bugs
>: causing data to be lost on systems running 2.2.7 (or so, it is
>: hard to get good info) to 2.2.10 kernels?
>
>They would have cared if they had known what they were seeing or
>even if they had seen it. Did any distro ship with 2.2.7? (I waited
>till 2.2.10 before judging 2.2. was safe). If so, there's the distros
>frontlining job ready and waiting to be done. If not, it's the experts
>job, and they'll mail a bug report to the kernel list.
I've forgotten which versions shipped with which kernel, but
there were a lot of cases of lost data reported. Many people
just assumed that was the nature of Linux filesystems. There
also was a long interval where people with RH 5.2 were gluing
various 2.2.x versions in to get reasonable SMP operation and
open file descriptor limits. The 2.2.x series is supposed
to be stable according to the numbering scheme - why should you
expect it to be broken?
>Note that "caring" is an idea introduced by you. I was talking
>about noticing.
Caring is is the issue when it comes to using Linux at all. Can
someone intelligently make a decision to store files they
care about on a Linux box? What basis do you have for the
answer without someone tracking real problems?
>: Then a central repository would be a good thing.
>
>Why? How does having a central repository increase the number of bug
>reports received by maintainers? I'd be interested to know, since
>part of your argument seemed to be that it would reduce the number.
>Are you shifting your accounting methods? That's OK, but make it plain.
Having a central repository would make it possible to see if
a bug had already been reported. If it hasn't, it would encourage
people to take the trouble to report the new ones and they
would be able to report any new unreported details about existing
ones without a lot of duplication.
>: Nice try. How about NFS?
>
>How about it.
The fact that you don't know about it doesn't say much for the
state of the art in Linux problem reporting, does it?
>You are saying that no distro comes with NFS ready to go?
VALinux is the only one I know of that interoperates more or
less correctly with non-Linux systems, because they include
H.J. Lu's patches in the kernel as shipped.
>Well RH claims to, but we know that's not really so. Anyway - what's
>wrong with NFS? I've been running NFS with fanouts of 40+ for 7
>years now. Yeah, it's been slow, yeah it has strangenesses, but that's
>nfs, not linux, by and large. The only bug I've seen lately is one
>about creating a directory with perms 700 and then trying to run
>chmod a+rx on it on the client! No dice.
It has mostly worked OK with itself except for all_squash being
the default for at least several versions. The problem is with
other systems. I had a disk go out on a Sun box holding a
cvs repository and replaced it with an NFS mount from an
early 2.2.x kernel. Cvs locking is about as conservative as
you can get, using the creation of a directory as the lock.
I ended up with frequent lock contention where the directory
was actually gone, but still appeared in the client's view.
I fixed this by switching to cvs's client/server model, but
then found that doing a 'cp -R' to copy a directory tree from
a freebsd machine to a Linux-served NFS mount ended up with
mostly 0-length files.
>:>You miss my point. I am saying that a kernel bug is INTRINSICALLY hard
>:>to define. How do you know if the kernel is wrong? What is the standard
>:>against which you are measuring it?
>
>: The usual practice is to build regression tests for as much as
>: possible so you actually have an answer for this. The people
>
>Unfortunately that does not tell you anything. Change is often
>what was intended. The previous behaviour of the kernel is not
>the standard for the future behaviour. The kernel has started
>downing the whole interface when you down an alias of a net
>interface, for example. Is this a bug? (I have been dealing with
>this heavily today). Not according to most people on the kernel
>lists.
Of course it is a bug - even NT can do better than that. If you
change the behaviour you should change the test and document
the difference.
>No. I honestly can't imagine philosphical or theoretical points
>appearing in a M$ base. They appear to be about user perceptions.
>Thus they don't rise above the intellectual level of an anthill.
>
>: I think you underestimate the number of people who need this kind
>: of answer or the time it would take to supply the correct ones.
>
>I don't. I answer about 100 mails a day. Probably half of those dealing
>directly with codes I maintain. Most of the rest are dealing with
>conversations over other codes, other peoples bugs, projects past
>and present, articles, etc. etc.
How far can you scale this up? Can you double it every 6 months?
>: Great. Just don't suggest Linux as an alternative to supported
>: systems without letting people know what they are getting into.
>: I happen to enjoy a challenge myself, but that isn't true for
>: everyone.
>
>As you know, it's a very heavily supported system.
In its own quirky way. What the developers accomplish is
great, of course, but they have their limits. I just don't
think the support system can sustain growth. Even without
a flurry of new bugs (which we may get with 2.4) the number
of new people hitting old bugs is bound to grow, and these
people don't need developer attention at all.
>you find a bug,
>why, just mail the maintainer concerned. They'll be happy to help
>you out. No walls of secrecy.
Secrecy isn't an issue when nobody even knows all the problems.
>: Do you mind if I quote this the next time someone asks if Linux
>: is suitable for some particular job?
>
>Sure. It's an excellent recommendation. You have wonderful full
>contact with the developers themselves! Wow! None of that dealing
>with idiot desk staff.
Yes, this is nice sometimes, but generally not. Suppose the
question was needing files bigger than 2 gigs on pentium
machines. How much developer time does each end user need
to burn on that question?
>: Once upon a time I tried to run a windows program under VMWare
>: that listened to a network broadcast. It didn't work. Why
>: was it impossible at the time for me to find out that there
>: was a problem with the eepro100 and multicasts and thus
>: didn't have anything to do with VMWare? (I only know now because
>
>It became known to those of us on the lists that the eepro100 has a
>limit of three hardware-serviced addresses. Anything more needs
>a firmware trick and there are firmware bugs connected with it.
>I.e. you should limit the hardware filters to three by telling the
>driver so. It took a looong time to discover the bug. And whose bug is
>it? Intel's? Donald's?
That's exactly my point. There were people who knew about it
but going through all the channels I could find turned up
nothing.
>The multicast problem is not necessarily due to the eepro100, BTW.
>There has been a longstanding bug conected with bridging and multicast.
That could be it too, especially since I was only dealing with
one address.
>: OK, the fact that no one wants to do it is a legitimate issue for
>: an all-volunteer effort. But you could have admitted that in
>: the first place instead of trying to claim that it is not
>: needed or wanted.
>
>It is not needed and not wanted. There! And the reason is not that nobody
>wants to set it up, but that nobody wants to be constrained to use it.
>
>Sure, start one up, but don't expect it to be used exclusively. I don't
>kow what the effect would be. I think it wouldn't catch on.
The effect would be that people would know what to expect from
a Linux machine. That's mostly the point of bug tracking systems
although getting the bugs fixed eventually is sometimes a side
effect. However, it would have to be used heavily enough to
accumulate at least the mainstream bugs.
>: 2.2.x kernel has had kernel NFS right. Bugs are going to crop up
>
>It's fairly right. Clearly faster than 2.0.* NFS.
I've only used solaris and freebsd against it, and both failed
in various ways. I've seen reports of aix/hpux having
similar problems. H. J. Lu found enough wrong that he has
gone to the trouble of assembling patches to the kernel
and tools after about every release. Has it been tested at all
in cross-platform situations - where would I find the results?
It is hard to use the excuse of not knowing expected behaviour
for nfs as a reason for not testing.
>: everywhere and people have to know about them to avoid and
>: work around the problems.
>
>But these are not kernel "problems". They are simply characteristics of
>the present linux behaviour. They have to be learned in the same way as
>always.
The way things stand, every user has to experience every problem.
That is even worse than commercial systems where they may not
let you see the real bug reports but will at least try to steer
you away from them.
>Are you saying that the raw admin has no way of finding out that
>the rest of the world doesn't trust knfsd?
Yes, and when he loses data and tries to find the solution it still
is not easy. And it isn't much consolation to see that all of
the other admins who tried something similar have been having
the same thing happen for a year now. Why was knfsd blessed
into an even-number stable release if it isn't trusted anyway?
>He also has no way of
>finding out that admining solaris nis+ is a nightmare best left
>untouched. Except that he has. And has. In both cases he can go and ask
>on the newsgroups. Same as always.
Try it. If you do a search you'll find my questions and a bunch
of others with a lot of wrong answers and no system to tie them
to the right answer if there ever is one.
>Ask yourself "bugs known by WHOM"?
That's the problem. If anyone knows, why doesn't everyone?
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
