Linux-Advocacy Digest #717, Volume #26 Sat, 27 May 00 14:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX (JEDIDIAH)
Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX (JEDIDIAH)
Re: linuxcare failure - more proof of how OSS fails ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0 (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Need ideas for university funded project for linux (Craig Kelley)
Re: FFS, RIAA sues SuperPimpSoft (Craig Kelley)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux vs. Solaris Intel (Craig Kelley)
Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It? (Leslie Mikesell)
Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com (jasper)
Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com (jasper)
Re: IBM finally admits OS/2 is dead, officially. ("Raymond Swaim")
Re: how to enter a bug report against linux? (Leslie Mikesell)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 16:23:49 GMT
On Sat, 27 May 2000 07:05:18 GMT, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Unless you are actually running one the other or both, your
>>system isn't being burdened by them.
>
>I let Linux Mandrake 7.0 install everything... why not? On a 15GByte drive,
>there's plenty of space! At first I thought having Gnome (the desktop)
>installed was unnecessary waste, but what you're saying is I only need
>specific bits of Gnome... the only snag is that it does look a little
>different from other KDE apps.
Of course it does. There wouldn't really be much point of GNOME
being a seperate entity if it weren't distinct in some way.
Visual distinctiveness in interfaces is one of the easiest sorts
of variety to get away with.
...although KDE is dragging it's feet on Xdnd.
>
>>>>Doesn't ghostscript take -r1440x720 as an argument?
>>>
>>>How does that help me?
>>
>> Ghostscript is typically what translates the defacto standard
>>Linux/Unix page layout language into something a particular printer
>>will understand.
>
>If I select File | Print in a GUI application, am I given the opertunity of
>selecting what you say? I've not tried this yet.
>
Orientation.
Ordering.
Color.
Paper Size.
Tray Destination.
These all have their PS equivalents so any app or API that generates
PS could imbed these into the output without getting into tweaking
with the printer control stream once it has been translated into it's
native format.
There are a couple of applets that do the 'post translation' tweaking
too.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: There is NO reason to use Linux...It just STINX
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 16:25:03 GMT
On Sat, 27 May 2000 07:06:21 GMT, Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote in
><8gmo64$171o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>>The 1520 is in a P166 box, the AHA2940 is in the PII-400MHz.
>>
>>Is there a feature the 1520 has that the driver doesn't handle?
>
>The 1520 has a BIOS, which I thought meant Linux could auto detect it.
>Apparently not.
The BIOS is something that the card uses quite independently of the OS.
--
In what language does 'open' mean 'execute the evil contents of' |||
a document? --Les Mikesell / | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: linuxcare failure - more proof of how OSS fails
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 16:27:19 GMT
Wow, management blaiming software for management shortcomings! Wow, I've
never seen THAT before.
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "concedes the IT unit shied away from using some open-source apps,
because
> they weren't convinced that the [OSS] software was capable of running
a
> world-class services organization. "When we got here, [the tech
> infrastructure] was a total mess. All this spaghetti code patching
> everything together ... It's all we saw," says the source"
>
> http://www.zdnet.com/sr/stories/news/0,4538,2573035-1,00.html
>
> Read the whole thing...
>
> Linuxcare itself was using Lotus Notes and other properitary software,
> completely avoiding any open source software. I mean, if they couldn't
trust
> OSS for themselves, how could they be the #1 support source for Linux?
Can't
> find the right software, can't find the people to write it right.
>
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Installing Linux Mandrake 7.0
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 16:42:15 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Colin R. Day <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Sat, 27 May 2000 01:22:27 -0400 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>
>> You'd be giving up Microsoft Word -- *the* word processor on Windows.
>> Maybe. (There's also Write -- now WordPad, apparently. Of course,
>> Write seems to just be an encapsulation of a Windows widget that
>> understands, among other things, OLE/COM.) Gosh, what a sacrifice,
>> especially since TeX does equations better anyway, once one masters
>> formatting commands such as $a^2 = b^2 + c^2$, $e^{i\pi} = -1$.
>> and
>>
>> $$
>> \eqalign {
>> ax^2 + bx + c &= 0 \cr
>> x^2 + {{bx}\over a} + {c \over a} &= 0 \cr
>> x^2 + {{bx}\over a} &= -{c \over a} \cr
>> x^2 + {{bx}\over a} + {{b^2} \over {4a^2} } &= -{c \over a}
>> + {{b^2} \over {4a^2} } \cr
>> (x + {b \over {2a})^2 &= -{c \over a} + {{b^2} \over {4a^2} } \cr
>> &= {{b^2 - 4ac} \over {4a^2}}
>> }
>> $$ [+]
>>
>> which looks intimidating, but isn't hard to master for simple
>> equations. It's also easy to work with; if the equation's
>> wrong, edit the file in any old text editor. The vi editor
>> works very well with this format, too, because '%' matches
>> parenthesis, brackets, and braces.
>>
>> Obviously, I'm a mathematician. :-) There's also variants such
>> as LaTeX, which allows styles; I'm not up on the details, and
>> front ends such as LyX, which eventually feed a TeX backend.
>>
>
>You also have good taste in typesetting. At the risk of starting
>a flamewar, can you latex a file inside of vi? You can do it in
>emacs.
If you just mean run latex, then saving the file and then
:!(latex file.tex; xdvi file.dvi)
or
!!(latex file.tex; xdvi file.dvi)
would probably work. I'm not sure what you mean. (Note that the
second one actually eats a line in the file; it's supposed to be used
as a filter. :-) )
Or do you mean the creation of a temporary file and latexing that?
(That might make more sense as a question; vi can't do that as such,
but one could use ':w /tmp/blahblah.tex', which is admittedly a bit silly.
One could write a LISP procedure in emacs to do this more or less
"automagically".)
One issue is that emacs doesn't do pictures, AFAIK. It's a
text editor with a *lot* of capabilities added in, including web browsing
(somewhat a la lynx, I would think), file management, and even silliness
such as an Eliza emulator. :-) But then, there's that flight sim
in Excel, so who's to say? :-)
And thank you; one of the reasons I do like TeX is that it does the
job very well and is easy to work with, especially within VI and its
parenthesis/bracket/brace matching. My main problem with TeX is that
xdvi is slightly brain-dead, but I hope to fix that someday when I have
some spare amount of time to slap a more intelligent GUI (my own :-) )
on it. Another issues is that TeX's picture inclusion, last time I
looked, was somewhat lacking, although something like LaTeX might
work around that in various ingenious ways -- I don't know, haven't looked,
not much of an issue at this point for me. (It will be interesting to
see if I can extend TeX, or if it's already been extended, to include
a fixed-size rectangle and then do some sort of overlay.)
>
>>
>> You'd be giving up Visual C++, Visual Basic, Visual J++, Visual Foxpro,
>> Visual This, Visual That. I can't say I'd miss them too much, although
>> they're snappier than Borland JBuilder. :-) On the other hand, I
>> get the feeling that Borland JBuilder is rock solid -- and I've had
>> VC++ crash twice on me. Now I do use VC++ quite a bit more, but
>> crashes don't make me too happy. Also, J++ is a bit of an exception; it
>> is s-l-o-w to bring up for some reason when double-clicking on a .java
>> file.
>>
>> I've also caught the compiler of VC++ 5.0 in at least one peculiar bug.
>> Can't remember the details, now, but it was corrupting memory and
>> generating bad output. Hopefully VC++ 6 has fixed it, but how
>> do I tell?
>>
>> (I will grant that Visual Basic, in the hands of an expert, can do
>> nice things, for small projects. Now whether it scales up is
>> a matter of some debate.)
>>
>
>What about python?
What about it? I'm not familiar with it, other than that RedHat uses it.
I haven't heard anything horribly bad about it, though. :-)
Part of the reason I say this is that I was slightly embarrassed by a
co-worker who had a completely working (and debugged!) project while
I was still setting up for a C++ build and coding. Granted, this was
a weird special case (we were trying to interface to an IIS/ASP server
and encode and decode a VBasic array; turns out VBasic could write
objects to and, more importantly, read objects from a binary file.
Oh well!). Of course, this doesn't mean VBasic is better at everything,
any more than a Mack Truck is bested by a tricycle simply because the
tricycle user can make it to the neighbor's house faster than the Mack
Truck can be entered, fired up, back out, back in, shut down, and
exited. :-)
But it does depend a bit on the job required. Tricycles don't do well
on interstate highways; Mack Trucks don't do sidewalks. :-)
>
>
><snip>
>
>Colin Day
>
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- MS Word. Jack of all, master of none.
------------------------------
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: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 24 May 2000 12:32:39 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) writes:
> >But there is no reason to expect it to be any better. Is there a tool
> >that tells you when the last program that uses a shared library
> >has been removed?
>
> Sure there is. It could query the actual state of the system
> rather than just keeping track of what packages had been
> manipulated.
A database is the only way to really solve this problem with any
speed. Sure, you could find(1) all executables and ldd them to see
which libraries they use, but what a waste of time. It won't even
work all the time (What about an application which is on an unmounted
disk? What about an application which uses dlopen(3)?)
For all the faults in dpkg and rpm; they are light-years ahead of
autoconf, even for source (which I usually use -- I hate precompiled
stuff).
--
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: FFS, RIAA sues SuperPimpSoft
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 24 May 2000 12:42:19 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Winsper) writes:
> OK, I can understand why the RIAA are pissed over Napster, but sueing
> SuperPimpSoft is just plain lame.
>
> SuperPimpSoft produce PAN, a very nice GTK based newsreader. One of
> its features is it can automatically decode multi-part binaries. The
> RIAA don't like this, apparently because you can use it to decode
> *gasp* MP3s.
>
> The RIAA have demanded SuperPimpSoft remove the auto-decoder from PAN,
> and SuperPimpSoft have refused, hence a lawsuit will follow. See
> http://www.superpimp.org for more details.
>
> I really *really* don't like this, but I doubt the RIAA will win.
> However, in the USA, the land of litigat^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hfreedom, anything
> seems to go these days.
>
> What a sad world we live in.
This boggles the mind.
What's next? Linux?
It can be used to decode binaries...
--
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.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 25 May 2000 16:21:30 -0600
Donavon Pfeiffer Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> And when the Senator from Novell launches his hearings, it won't be
> the first time a corporation was able to use politicians to kill the
> competition.
>
> The fact is if Bill had pumped the same money into
> Washington early on as everyone else, this case case ,regardless of
> its merits, would never have been brought.
The fact is: can you imagine only having Wal-Mart to shop at?
I don't think people would put up with a 95% retail monopoly, but they
crawl out in droves to defend it in the software world.
--
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: Linux vs. Solaris Intel
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 26 May 2000 11:09:49 -0600
2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >That is quite true - I doubt that there are any major Solaris sites running on
> > >x86 hardware. However, if you build on Solaris, you do have the option of
> > >moving up to large SPARC machines at very little effort if you outgrow the
> > >x86.
> >
> > You have that option with any Unix.
>
> True, but ports are never just a matter of recompilation, other stuff
> needs to be done. Going from solaris/intel to solaris/sparc should be
> easier.
I moved our rather large application from AIX to HPUX and it now
resides on an SMP Linux box. It wasn't very difficult at all.
YMMV, of course.
--
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] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Would a M$ Voluntary Split Save It?
Date: 27 May 2000 12:04:21 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Joseph <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>"Seán Donnchadha" wrote:
>
>> You're out of your mind. The price of operating systems has remained
>> roughly the same, while their power and functionality has skyrocketed.
>> What the hell is wrong with that?
>
>Windows 2000 is $300.
>
>The price of harware has dropped while the power has skyrocketed.
>
>As a fraction of the cost of a PC, the OS's slice is eating into the
>pie.
And, of course, if you want it to do anything, you have to get
Advanced Server at $3,000 each, and pay for client licenses for
all the boxes that use it even for authentication.
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why my company will NOT use Linux
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 17:24:03 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Sam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote on Sat, 27 May 2000 16:01:23 +1000
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>On Sat, 27 May 2000 04:35:53 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The
>Ghost In The Machine) wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>The possibilities are nearly limitless.
>>
>>Just to be even more complicated -- one of the options with RedHat
>>at least (and probably other distributions as well) is the ability
>>to build the system from source, thereby limiting issues with
>>corrupted binaries (accidentally or intentionally). One allocates
>>sufficient disk space, sets up a system, builds, then provides the
>>binary packages to other, presumably identically-configured, systems.
>>
>>Try *that* with Windows! :-)
>
>Why ?
Why not? :-)
Considering Windows doesn't offer source, that's why one might have
trouble with this particular option.
Of course, Windows has (a few) other advantages that Linux doesn't offer.
(One of them is near-ubiquity; there are advantages to being a
monopoly, after all.... :-) )
>
>Also, If you have trouble with corrupted binaries then the same
>problem will probably occur with source. (accidentally or
>intentionally)
And why might that be? Of course, the source might be corrupted,
which means it'll probably not get to the binary stage (the
build would crap out, first, in many cases).
One can also sign the binaries, a la ActiveX. At least that will
take care of accidental corruption (e.g., forgetting to use "binary"
in an FTP session during download, or a file gets truncated), in most
cases...intentional is another thing entirely.
>
>Sam
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: jasper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 19:20:21 -0400
Brad,
Thanks for the OS overview. I still got your articles (printed) like the "OS/2
Past, Present and Future". Very good stuff.
I would say "Keep on writing"
regards,
Jasper de Keijzer
http://home-5.worldonline.nl/~jdekeij
Brad wrote:
> After months of playing around with the various operating systems I've
> managed to complete OSWars 2000, the follow-up to OSWars '98.
>
> The article is at:
> http://www.stardock.com/stardock/articles/oswars2000.html
>
> The Topics included are:
>
> Macintosh:
> I didn't think it was fair to cover MacOS X (server) or the currently
> available desktop version of MacOS with Aqua coming out relatively soon. So
> I'll do a follow-on when MacOS X with Aqua is available as I think Mac users
> will like how that turns out. I think that MacOS X with Aqua has a good
> chance of luring many PC power users over to the Macintosh. I know as a
> software developer, the events on the Macintosh recently have been pretty
> exciting.
>
> Linux:
> I gave Linux the most space this time around because it's the hardest one to
> cover fairly. Linux has so many really incredible strengths but has many
> weaknesses that are, unfortunately, not clear cut. To some people, an OS
> that requires reasonably compotent computer users to operate is a good thing
> wheras to others it's a bad thing.
>
> Windows 2000:
> Windows 2000 got covered as it's the latest version of NT and it's actually
> turned out pretty well for the most part. It's the OS I am running as I
> type this. If Microsoft wasn't such a bastard I think they'd hear more
> people patting them on the back for their efforts.
>
> Windows 98:
> Well, this has to get covered as it's the most widely used desktop OS in the
> world sadly enough. The Big Mac is probably the world's best selling
> hamburger but probably not the world's best burger <grin>. Win98 is the big
> mac of OSes. It gets the job done for most people but not much else.
>
> OS/2 Warp:
> Some people might question including OS/2 in this at this point but my
> background is in OS/2 and I'm pretty fond of the operating system (I still
> run it on a few machines around here). Its main problem is that its parent
> wants it to go away and has made it increasingly clear that they want it to
> go away. But many of the users of OS/2 simply won't let it because it
> actually is a pretty terrific operating system even by today's standards.
>
> BeOS:
> Be was smart to release the personal edition. I don't cover BeOS a great
> deal though but I think it's a fine OS.
>
> The full article is pretty lengthy. You can email me any questions or
> comments to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or to my personal address
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] BTW, my opinions reflect my own and not of my
> employer, this is purely for the enjoyment of my fellow OS fanatics. ;)
>
> Again:
> http://www.stardock.com/stardock/articles/oswars2000.html
>
> Brad
------------------------------
From: jasper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: OSWars 2000 at www.stardock.com
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 19:26:39 -0400
I wished there was a book which compared all those OS's and showing screen shots
and of course with good conclusions. I've never seen one besides those articles in
PC- magazines. In most cases they are not fair because the magazines highly depend
on the add income.
Jasper de Keijzer.
http://home-5.worldonline.nl/~jdekeij
"David D. Huff Jr." wrote:
> Brad if you and Esther wrote a book I would buy it just so I could burn it.
>
> Brad wrote:
>
> > After months of playing around with the various operating systems I've
> > managed to complete OSWars 2000, the follow-up to OSWars '98.
> >
> > The article is at:
> > http://www.stardock.com/stardock/articles/oswars2000.html
> >
> > The Topics included are:
> >
> > Macintosh:
> > I didn't think it was fair to cover MacOS X (server) or the currently
> > available desktop version of MacOS with Aqua coming out relatively soon. So
> > I'll do a follow-on when MacOS X with Aqua is available as I think Mac users
> > will like how that turns out. I think that MacOS X with Aqua has a good
> > chance of luring many PC power users over to the Macintosh. I know as a
> > software developer, the events on the Macintosh recently have been pretty
> > exciting.
> >
> > Linux:
> > I gave Linux the most space this time around because it's the hardest one to
> > cover fairly. Linux has so many really incredible strengths but has many
> > weaknesses that are, unfortunately, not clear cut. To some people, an OS
> > that requires reasonably compotent computer users to operate is a good thing
> > wheras to others it's a bad thing.
> >
> > Windows 2000:
> > Windows 2000 got covered as it's the latest version of NT and it's actually
> > turned out pretty well for the most part. It's the OS I am running as I
> > type this. If Microsoft wasn't such a bastard I think they'd hear more
> > people patting them on the back for their efforts.
> >
> > Windows 98:
> > Well, this has to get covered as it's the most widely used desktop OS in the
> > world sadly enough. The Big Mac is probably the world's best selling
> > hamburger but probably not the world's best burger <grin>. Win98 is the big
> > mac of OSes. It gets the job done for most people but not much else.
> >
> > OS/2 Warp:
> > Some people might question including OS/2 in this at this point but my
> > background is in OS/2 and I'm pretty fond of the operating system (I still
> > run it on a few machines around here). Its main problem is that its parent
> > wants it to go away and has made it increasingly clear that they want it to
> > go away. But many of the users of OS/2 simply won't let it because it
> > actually is a pretty terrific operating system even by today's standards.
> >
> > BeOS:
> > Be was smart to release the personal edition. I don't cover BeOS a great
> > deal though but I think it's a fine OS.
> >
> > The full article is pretty lengthy. You can email me any questions or
> > comments to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or to my personal address
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] BTW, my opinions reflect my own and not of my
> > employer, this is purely for the enjoyment of my fellow OS fanatics. ;)
> >
> > Again:
> > http://www.stardock.com/stardock/articles/oswars2000.html
> >
> > Brad
------------------------------
From: "Raymond Swaim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: IBM finally admits OS/2 is dead, officially.
Date: Sat, 27 May 2000 12:33:28 -0500
At least OS/2 *had* a life. Remember Cairo? It died in the
abortion clinic.
RSS
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> WELL, IT'S FINALLY official: OS/2 is dead. IBM announced
recently that the
> product once dubbed the "better Windows than Windows" has
reached the end of
> the line and will be phased out within a year, beginning
with the client
> version, which will see its last update, or "fixpack" in
IBM-speak, in
> January 2001. Then the server and Workspace on Demand
versions will be
> updated for the last time in May 2001. After that, support
for selected OS/2
> products will be offered only on a special-bid, fee-based
system. Like the
> Mac OS, OS/2 suffered dramatic and irreversible
marketshare losses when
> Microsoft released Windows 95 in 1995
>
> http://www.wininformant.com/display.asp?ID=2745
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: how to enter a bug report against linux?
Date: 27 May 2000 12:34:11 -0500
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Richard Steiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>A lot depends on whether the overhead of the system justifies its use.
>>>Not all systems are worth the effort in all cases, and I know some folks
>>>who are quite unhappy about the overhead involved in some of the more
>>>complex commercial change-control systems (as an example).
>>
>>If you are not happy with the source control system you are using, get
>>a better one. The answer is NOT not to use one.
>
>All I'm saying is that it depends on the context.
>
>As an example, I don't use any formal source control at all for the
>several utilities that I maintain at my workplace other than a text
>file in which I keep a TODO list. It simply isn't needed for 20000
>lines of code that I alone maintain.
Yes, someone working alone on in-house code is only going to be testing
one new change at a time and all you need is a backup of the last good
copy to back it out. Add a couple more developers and you'll start
stepping on each others toes pretty quickly - especially if you
ever revert back to an older copy and completely discard someone
else's work. Also, if you ever distribute versions that you have
to support instead of always forcing an upgrade to the current
version to fix any problem you need a way to reconstruct every
version you still support and add a fix, possibly without changing
the current version.
>Not something that large, no, at least without strict segmentation of
>programmer responsibility (which is itself a form of source control,
>at least arguably).
The other thing you get from source control systems is a history
of changes, whether the programmer bothers to comment them or not.
Even where a single programmer is doing everything you have to
consider that eventually someone else will take over the job and
have to figure things out. Often by seeing a history of changes
that have been tried and replaced, you can avoid repeating a mistake.
Cvs is free, fairly painless, works cross-platform and gives you
a nice consolidated area to back up even if your working/testing
space is distributed. I'd recommend it for your 20000 lines of code
even if the kernel never goes that route.
>I am not more than passingly familiar with the kernel lists.
>
>I was just commenting on the fact that you apparently are not either,
>and yet you seem perfectly willing to criticize processes that appear
>at least based on the end results) to be working quite well.
It is hard to beat direct communication for quick turnaround on
problems, but there is no reason to think that a formal bug
tracking process would have to eliminate that. In commercial
systems it often does that intentionally to shield the developers
from time consuming interaction with end users, but that
effect is not necessary.
>Their development processes can probably be improved, but whining about
>it here in this unrelated newsgroup is NOT (IMO) a constructive way to
>do it! I suggest you join the kernel mailing lists and read a while.
The real problem from an admin/user perspective is that the system
is more than the kernel. A typical system might have a thousand
programs that run every day. The kernel's function is mostly
to interact properly with the user level programs, and it is the
interaction that has to work from the user's side. It is nice
to know when a real bug exists so that you can go directly to
the workaround instead of fighting with it, and even better to
know when the bug is fixed so you can stop doing the workaround,
but from a functional level it doesn't matter whether the bug is
in the kernel or the apps.
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
******************************
