Linux-Advocacy Digest #791, Volume #26 Wed, 31 May 00 17:13:07 EDT
Contents:
Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead (Karl Knechtel)
Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1 innovations) (ZnU)
Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day (Nathaniel Jay
Lee)
GNOME.org needs to get their act together... (Streamer)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (abraxas)
Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers (abraxas)
Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1 innovations)
(Cary Quinn)
Re: Once again: Open-Source != Security; PGP Provides Example (Salvador Peralta)
Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (Nathaniel Jay Lee)
Re: Neologism of the day (EdWIN)
Re: Stuff you cant do with windows (abraxas)
Re: GNOME.org needs to get their act together... (abraxas)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Knechtel)
Subject: Re: Goodwin's Law invoked - Thread now dead
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 19:32:04 GMT
Marty ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: Not familiar with the comic stylings of Dave Tholen, eh? No matter.
On what basis do you make this claim?
: Steve White wrote:
: >
: > whom you haven't met.
: On what basis do you make this claim?
It would seem the burden of proof is on you.
: > You could be his doppelganger,
: On what basis do you make this ridiculous claim?
Incorrect.
: > but that would require you to make sense,
: That would not be adequate proof that I was his "doppelganger" (sic).
Illogical. He claims it would be necessary, not that it would be sufficient.
: > and you don't.
: Incorrect.
Prove it, if you think you can.
: > Given your writing style, however, you might be the doppelganger of King
: > Kong,
: Do you claim familiarity with the writing style of King Kong? Impossible.
On what basis do you make this claim.
: > Can't do a better insult than that unless you give me more material.
: You are erroneously presupposing that I desire a "better" insult.
Balderdash. The sort of insult you "desire" is irrelevant. What you can
prove is relevant.
: > Fovell works wonders with single words at times,
: How often is "at times"?
Don't you know?
: > but I lack his panache.
: Unfortunately, that's not all you lack, given your lack of a logical argument.
How ironic.
: > but I digress.
: Why?
Don't you know?
: > The Kong-ness of such a venture is evident to any regular here,
: Incorrect, as "here" consists of CSMA, COOA, COLA, and COMS-WNA.
Typical pontification.
: > Marty, clearly you're in the running for the ROOA
: What I'm clearly in the running for is irrelevant.
Incorrect.
: > though you need to work on the obtuse-ness of your writing (as in, increase
: > it).
: Liar. The degree of my obtuse-ness is more than adequate.
Is is more or less than 135 degrees?
: > let alone csma.
: CSMA is irrelevant.
How ironic.
: > Indeed, proof is irrelevant
: Evidence, please.
Illogical.
Karl Knechtel {:>
da728 at torfree dot net
------------------------------
From: ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy
Subject: Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1
innovations)
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 20:13:15 GMT
In article <8gv4el$r9a$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Piers B."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You ignoramus,
>
> Who do you think helped IBM and Apple in the eighties ( re 80's for
> those who have literacy problems)???? IBM and Apple wouldn't have
> been the companies they were if it wasn't for Microsoft.
IBM could have found another company to provide DOS. Microsoft was but
one of many companies producing productivity software for the Mac.
> Not to
> mention at how IBM treated the desktop user space when they and
> Microsoft split their co-designed OS efforts. OS2 desktop users have
> been consistantly shafted by IBM even if it was a superior product to
> Microsofts offerings of the day. MS has pushed personal computing
> further than Apple and IBM have anyday, sure they haven't been at the
> for-front like Amiga was but look at Amiga now, just dust. I also
> don't condone MS's market strongman tactics but I can tell you I'd
> take Win2K over any for of Unix for the desktop anyday. BeOS is the
> only real contender and they are a few years behind in features and
> applications. Mac OSX, please give me a break, Unix (FreeBSD) with a
> pretty Xwindow manager tacked on to try and hide it but with all the
> inherrent problems Unix has like their antiquated File naming system.
You evidently know nothing at all about Mac OS X. It isn't FreeBSD
(unless you'd like to tell me what FreeBSD distros are based on Mach?),
it doesn't run X11 at all, so it would be difficult for it to run an X
window manager, and if by "antiquated File naming system" you refer to
the normal somewhat cryptic Unix directory structure, you'll be happy to
hear that OS X's directory structure is almost totally different.
OS X's architecture is far beyond anything that will likely be available
from Microsoft any time soon.
> As for Sun, screw them cause they don't give a toss about the
> desktop and are only getting at MS cause they see a real percieved
> threat to their Workstation and Server markets.
>
> Anyway, my rant and my OS's of choice are Win2K and BeOS ones usefull
> and the other an elegant new OS with little functionability. Sorry to
> say this to fellow BeOS users and I still love using this OS but it
> still can't allow me to do professional 2D work or play games that I
> want (sims and FPS like SS2) or watch DVD's or run Java (but I really
> can live without that one). It's still in it's infancy but one to
> watch over the comming year especially with OpenGL hardware support
> and BONE networking which will give Sun and other Unixies a real
> headach if implemented well (BeOS has the potential to blow them
> away).
>From what you describe here it sounds like you'd be very happy with OS
X. You might try learning something about it.
--
The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected.
-- The Unix Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972
ZnU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://znu.dhs.org>
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Why We Should Be Nice To Windows Users -was- Neologism of the day
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 15:13:27 -0500
tinman wrote:
>
> [groups snipped]
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Nathaniel Jay Lee
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> >
> > I ask, do I need to continue to treat this type of person with respect.
> > I don't feel he deserves respect, and as it seems to look like a good
> > possibility that I will end up losing my job over this (install windows,
> > or lose my job, which would you do?). And the reasoning behind why I
> > can't keep Linux on the network: not because Linux has failed us, not
> > because Linux isn't ready for use, not because anyone has an actual
> > complaint against any of the software we have used, but because we
> > brought in someone new that is supposed to be a salesman that decided he
> > had to have Windows to survive. And when asked why he has to have
> > Windows, his sound mind comes up with this: "We have to have Windows
> > because that's what everyone else uses." Period. Not a very good
> > reason in my mind. But I have decided that if the bosses actually fall
> > for this I probably don't really want to work here after all. Why would
> > I want to work for a company where everyone would throw themselves off a
> > cliff if "everyone else" did?
>
> Well, while I appreciate your frustration, but IMO you do need to continue
> to treat this yutz with respect--that is part of your job as a support
> person. Of course, if you're ever not happy in a job, considering your
> options is a good thing to do--there's lots of work out there....('
>
> Main thing to remember is it's just a job....
>
> Now, obviously this is a problem and needs resolution. Seems to me you
> have a few options:
>
> *You probably need to treat him as a VIP. Ironically, this is generally
> the best way to deal with a pesky client, not because it makes them happy
> (usually it doesn't), but because it establishes your desire to maintain a
> high level of professionalism in dealing with a client who is using up a
> lot of your time. The one thing you don't want to do is complain about him
> up the chain--it's your job to support clients, and complaining about them
> generally reflects much more badly on you than on them. If he's really a
> pain, and you're acting like a prince, it's most likely folks will catch
> on (so far, I've never had a troublesome client that wasn't troublesome in
> general, and didn't have that rep throughout). You should also document
> your interactions with him, email is very good for this, and include all
> the email in the trouble tickets (so that if there is a need to review how
> a particular problem was handled, it's all there). If your bosses want you
> to support him on windows, and you don't have the chops, get them to get
> you some training. What you really need to establish is that you've done
> everything in your power to accomodate this client.
See, this sounds like a good idea, except for the fact that all of the
management made a decision to adopt Linux as a standard, everyone needs
to accept it. Now, they accept that we need a standard, but they think
Windows should be the standard. I've supported Windows before, and with
this guy I am being told to support it again. One Windows user=3 hours
added to my week at a minimum. I was told to develop a standard, I did
and 16 users are happy with that standard. 1 user isn't happy and all
the rest are ready to jump ship because of it. I know how to administer
Windows, I just don't want to do it again. I'm not ready to start
spending my nights at the office again, and I'll be damned if I give up
my home life (small as it may be) for some Windows administration
because one user is a dumbass. Linux allows us to accomplish something
you can't with Windows, keep the users from destroying thier own
machine. I will not go back to that shit again. Period.
>
> *Keep good records at to what you do for him and how much time all of that
> takes. A good problem tracking system is an excellent way to do this (if
> you want to jaw about this outside this group, feel free to mail me, this
> is a pet area of mine--I'll be off line shortly for a few days, but will
> catch up with you). If he really is a drain on resources, good records
> will help you establish this as fact. The goal here is to show with good
> data what it costs the company to accomodate this client.
We've already been through this, the only person that agrees with me
that we shouldn't have to spend 3 extra hours a week working on one
system is the money man for the company. Unfortunately, his opinion
counts with the "real" boss about as much as mine.
>
> *Once you've got good records on how many resources he takes up, you've
> got some ammunition to discuss options. One would be to hire an additional
> full or part time person to handle windows support (and thus get it out of
> your hair). Another would be to send him off for training so he's more
> self supporting. A third, best if you're going have to support him and
> want to stay on, is to suggest that the company adopt a standard limited
> support model for alternate OSes. For windows, that means you getting
> training, locking him down with Win2K or NT so that he's limited in what
> he can install or change about the system (there is lots of data out there
> you can use to justify this, most corps use a standard install on standard
> hardware to reduce complexity and thus support costs), establishing a base
> install (that's restored when the machine goes wonky, so you don't have to
> spend extra time figuring out what went wrong), and making some
> adjustments in your server structure (you could use SAMBA, for example, to
> get him access to the linux server space so he can make backups, and you
> mentioned a mac guy, if you're running AFP, you could install an
> appleshare client on his machine).
>
> *The records thing is especially important if you think he might be able
> to convice higher ups that you all need to convert. If you have a well
> running system with linux as the core OS, and you can show that this one
> user is taking up a higher percentage of resources than other users,
> especially broken down into specific areas, well, you get the idea. But
> this will only work if you have a track record showing you always act in a
> professional manner, and if you have demonstrated that you know the issues
> involved in both linux and windows (if you haven't, most folks will assume
> that you're just complaining and resisting because you don't like windows,
> or are lazy, or (my fav) you're not a "team player").
>
> > As for the respect I have gotten from him. Here's his first statement
> > when he saw the system for the first time (this was at the login screen,
> > not even loggin in), "This is just a piece of shit. I can't use this."
> > After loggin in, before getting his first training session, his
> > statement was, "This is a bunch of shit, I need Windows." After his
> > first training session, his statement was, "How the fuck do you use this
> > bunch of shit. I can't believe you actually think a company can survive
> > without Windows. Give me Windows, or I can't get my work done."
> > Obviously a very open minded individual with an astute understanding of
> > computers.
>
> Hopefully, you weren't the only person to hear all of this. If you were,
> get more folks involved....
Actually, he has stated this many times to management. He has went to
management over and over and hit them in the head with the proverbial
baseball bat. I have seen him say right in front of the company owner
(if not directly to the company owner) that Linux is complete shit and
we have to use Windows to even think about getting work done. This is
his main argument. And the only one that he ever seems to bring up. I
say, if that sort of argument continues to work with management I don't
want to be here. The fact is, when the guy complains I always do the
same thing. I ask him what he needs to do (and yes, I am polite to
him), I show him how to accomplish it with the software already
installed on his machine, and I ask him if he need something more, or if
the software will do what he wants. He always tells me that will work
fine, then runs straight to my boss (the money man) and tells him that
Linux is a complete pile of shit and we need to have Windows. I'm
sorry, but I'm not going to convert the goddamn network to Windows. I
know it, I've done it before, I'm not fucking interested in spending the
rest of my life supporting something that is basically unsupportable. I
enjoy administering Linux or other Unix type systems (BSD and Solaris in
my experience at the moment). There are plenty of ISP jobs for these
types of systems in my area, it just pisses me off that I have to look
for another job because one person out of the whole company can't deal
with a little learning. What a bunch of crap.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> [snip]
>
> --
> ______
> tinman
------------------------------
From: Streamer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: GNOME.org needs to get their act together...
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 14:26:04 -0500
I just downloaded all of the newest gnome packages, and I've been trying
to compile the latest gnome (1.2). It is a slow go and very frustrating
because it requires so many libraries to compile before you even start
to compile the gnome* files. My latest frustration is trying to compile
gnome-core where the readme says all I need is gnome-libraries and
gdk-pixbuf...both which I have compiled and installed on my machine. I
compile gnome-core only to have it give me all sorts of undefined
symbols that belong to libxml. So I compile libxml and install it. Now
I have a whole bunch of other undefined symbols keeping the gnome-core
compilation from completing. I'm getting awfully tired of this run
around. Just how many more libraries do I have to put on my machine
before I can get gnome-core to complete? <BTW: gtk+ and glib 1.2.8 are
successfully compiled/installed on my machine>
Gnome.org may be making great strides with gnome, but with no accurate
instructions as to what exactly is needed and even what order everything
has to be compiled in (and making it a guessing game for a person like
me to compile), Nobody except Gnome.org will ever know how good Gnome is
probably getting....
This episode of trying to compile is just about enough to make me go
over to the KDE camp permanently. There I can just compile qt and the
kde* modules, and KDE is up and running. Maybe you guys writing Gnome
should maybe stop developing for a while, and make your
compile/installation procedures and documentation work as intended so
that others can compile and install by the same methods....WITHOUT
hunting for libraries/packages that nobody knew had any relevance for
gnome.
</End of venting>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: 31 May 2000 20:22:24 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Quoting abraxas from alt.destroy.microsoft; 31 May 2000 13:07:52 GMT
>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Quoting abraxas from alt.destroy.microsoft; 31 May 2000 04:36:06 GMT
> [...]
>>>>My reasoning for not using apostrophes in english contractions has
>>>>been beaten to death on usenet, and I shall not post it again.
>>
>>> Limited typing skills is about the only reason I can think of, but I
>>> don't want to pressure you.
>>
>>Thats not it.
>>
>>I wouldnt want to ask you to click around more than you absolutely
>>have to.
> Yea, a three word explanation from you is *way* more demanding than
> having me search through millions of old Usenet posts. I wouldn't want
> you to strain your typing skills.
Its not a three word explanation, it is in fact, multiple paragraphs.
You do not need to feign interest here, you may simply drop it and
save face if you like.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Crossposted-To: alt.microsoft.sucks,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Enemies of Linux are MS Lovers
Date: 31 May 2000 20:23:34 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Nobody <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 31 May 2000 04:36:06 GMT, abraxas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> Quoting abraxas from alt.destroy.microsoft; 31 May 2000 02:37:03 GMT
>>>>In comp.os.linux.advocacy [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>>>> I think you mean isn't.
>>>>
>>>>1. I do not use apostrophes in contractions. Deja for explanation.
>>
>>> 1) Deja isn't a contraction in English. Isn't is.
>>
>>My undying hope for the intellectual superiority of humans over ear
>>mites has suffered a mighty blow.
>>
>>> 2) English uses apostrophes in contractions.
>>
>>My reasoning for not using apostrophes in english contractions has
>>been beaten to death on usenet, and I shall not post it again.
>>
>>Again, deja for explanation.
> My search for "~a ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) & apostrophe* & contraction*"
> revealed nothing but your messages in this thread telling us to Deja
> for the answer. Please do explain again, this time using the words
> "apostrophe" and "contraction", with the e-mail address
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> in the From: header.
This is not my only moniker, lightbulb. Rub two braincells together
and figure it out.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: Cary Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy
Subject: Re: There is only one innovation that matters... (was Re: Micros~1
innovations)
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 14:23:49 -0600
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
First off, apologies for allowing this to continue as crossposted to
so many advocacy groups. I hope that the spirit of promoting
more accurate historical information will prove beneficial for
the advocacy of all groups.
Clem Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Have we all forgotten Digital Research? The guy - Gary Kildall - that started
>it all?
Started it all? <slight disagreement>. While I will agree that Kildall
was instrumental in developing the framework for the eventual sucess
of the microprocessor and the Personal Computer, even he had to
base his creations on what could be done with existing technology.
And even he made some bad business decisions that changed much
of what we take for granted in PCs today (although not as many
bad decisions as some people think).
>
>Who had his Operating System CP/M converted to run on the 8086, and was sold by
>Microsoft as Dos 1.0?
That is incorrect. CP/M-86 was still in development (but not available)
at that time. It was Tim Patterson at Seattle Computer Products that did
the code-work to create QDOS on the 8086/8088 processors.
It was Q-DOS that MS licensed from SCP and then to IBM as DOS 1.0.
Arguably, much of Patterson's work appeared to be direct imitation of
CP/M, but other features (such as its file allocation method) were
newer or at least could not be attributed to Kildalls work.
>Who was chased through the courts by Microsoft for daring to produce GEM (and
>other products)?
Are you sure about that? I thought it was Apple that was suing everyone
for "look and feel" infringements. Wasn't GEM out before Microsoft started
working on Windows?
>
>Who died a broken man a few years ago?
July of 1994. I cannot comment much on his state, except to
say that reports from those who knew him (thru a quick web search),
do not paint him as a "broken" man. He was unhappy about
the way his Digital Research (not to be confused with Digital Equipment
Corp) turned out, and somewhat bitter over the way the industry had
turned over the years. But, if not for his death, I think he would have
found new success at some other venture, or gone back to academia.
------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Once again: Open-Source != Security; PGP Provides Example
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 13:23:50 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
And the best way to adjust that attitude is by writing inflammatory
trolls in cola? No one ever said that every open source ap is bug-free,
but if one year is what it took to find this bug, how well does that
stack up to the 3 years that it took to find the most recent batch of
problems with front page 97? How many more years will we have to wait
for M$ to fix the permissions problems with word, back office, outlook,
et al?
Drestin Black wrote:
> I never made that claim nor comparison. It's the
> we're-perfect-cause-we're-open-source nose in the air attitude that needs
> readjustment to reality. as the subject line reads: Open-source!=Security.
--
Salvador Peralta
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.la-online.com
------------------------------
From: Nathaniel Jay Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.sys.be.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Subject: Re: There is only one innovation that matters...
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 15:22:32 -0500
John T Maguire wrote:
>
> On Wed, 31 May 2000 10:29:58 -0500, Nathaniel Jay Lee
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> {snip}
> ...
> >I remember this. I still have an Apple IIGS with BASIC on it. After
> >all these years I still enjoy firing it up every once in a while and
> >playing a game of Bard's Tale II (one specifically for the GS). That
> >was one hell of a system at the time. It had the option of running at
> >16MHZ or 8MHZ (wow) and a full 1 MB of memory. I remember being told by
> >the salesman when we bought the 1MB expansion card (about the size of a
> >full sized ISA/PCI card today) that we were nuts to buy that much
> >memory. We would never need it. It had a mouse included with it (the
> >first consumer PC that did so I believe)
>
> Sheesh, the GSII wasn't introduced until 1986, 2 years after the Mac
> which obviously did ship with a mouse...as did the Amiga, the Atari ST
> and so on.
>
>
> John T Maguire
> Mousam River Software: http://www.mousam-river.com/mousam.htm
> Kennebunkport WebCam Central: http://www.kportmaine.com/WCS/
>
I didn't say I was an authority on all things Apple, but I do remember
that the Mac wasn't out when we bought our Apple IIgs. It was rumored,
but you couldn't buy one. For some reason, I'm thinking '82, am I
completely fucked on this? I do know the salesman thought we were nuts
to need 1MB of memory. I guess I could open up the case and look at the
motherboard. I know it has dates on some of the chips.
Nathaniel Jay Lee
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Neologism of the day
From: EdWIN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.mac.advocacy,talk.bizarre
Date: Wed, 31 May 2000 13:24:21 -0700
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
herodotus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>shains adj. (derived from the vulgar epithet "shit for brains")
>ineffective, used esp. in a business setting to describe IT
>managers who replace FileMaker with Access
What's the epithet for people who think that a flat-file
database is as good as a relational database?
>* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's
Discussion Network *
>The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in
Usenet - Free!
>
>
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: Stuff you cant do with windows
Date: 31 May 2000 20:26:57 GMT
Jorge Cueto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Wow, works fine with my Riva TNT2 card. I even have 3D
>> acceleration and everything. You must be doing something wrong.
> Me too. Just can't use a plus in my card to digitalize full screen
> at 60 fps. As a graphics card it works fine. But let's forget it all :-)
>> And just what exactly is it supposed to support again?
> I don't mind Windows 2000 Data Center and mind me *****
> what it could do. I see Windows as a desktop environment, as
> a server, I by far prefer any kind of Unix, sometimes I'd use
> Solaris, other FreeBSD and other GNU/Linux. As a desktop,
> only GNU/Linux can even try to compete with Windows, and
> I know it is doing it very well ... just a little more evolution needed.
Wow. We agree nearly entirely.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas)
Subject: Re: GNOME.org needs to get their act together...
Date: 31 May 2000 20:28:00 GMT
Streamer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just downloaded all of the newest gnome packages, and I've been trying
> to compile the latest gnome (1.2). It is a slow go and very frustrating
> because it requires so many libraries to compile before you even start
> to compile the gnome* files. My latest frustration is trying to compile
> gnome-core where the readme says all I need is gnome-libraries and
> gdk-pixbuf...both which I have compiled and installed on my machine. I
> compile gnome-core only to have it give me all sorts of undefined
> symbols that belong to libxml. So I compile libxml and install it. Now
> I have a whole bunch of other undefined symbols keeping the gnome-core
> compilation from completing. I'm getting awfully tired of this run
> around. Just how many more libraries do I have to put on my machine
> before I can get gnome-core to complete? <BTW: gtk+ and glib 1.2.8 are
> successfully compiled/installed on my machine>
Hey dingleberry, point lynx at the sh script they provide...
It really is much, much easier.
=====yttrx
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
