Linux-Advocacy Digest #934, Volume #26 Tue, 6 Jun 00 16:13:14 EDT
Contents:
Re: The sad Linux story ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The State of the System Address (Cihl)
Re: windoze 9x, what a piece of shit! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ? (John Culleton)
Re: windoze 9x, what a piece of shit! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: windoze 9x, what a piece of shit! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Time to prove it's not just words ("Yannick")
Another ZDNet Story (Cihl)
Re: Boys Club for Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Boys Club for Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Boys Club for Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The sad Linux story (Craig Kelley)
Re: SVGALib ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The sad Linux story (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux+Java, the best combination of techologies (Pete Goodwin)
Re: The sad Linux story (Craig Kelley)
Re: SVGALib (JEDIDIAH)
Re: The sad Linux story (JEDIDIAH)
Re: HTML Help files (an updated set of man pages) (Pete Goodwin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The sad Linux story
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:15:33 GMT
On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 21:17:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
wrote:
>On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 21:04:02 GMT, Pete Goodwin
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote in <8hh3u1$18f8$1
>>@Mercury.mcs.net>:
>>
>>>You omitted the reference to KDE applications in your quote.
>>>What gave you the impression that Netscape is a KDE app?
>>
>>Nothing. It's obviously a hole in the whole desktop of KDE/Gnome/Whatever -
>
> It's a problem, but not quite the sort that you are representing
> it to be. That demonstrates you to be nothing more than a Troll
> that was never interested in anything but causing trouble.
No it demonstrates that Pete actually tried the operation and pointed
out the lack of consistancy between applications on a Linux system.
Linux is still a hodge-podge of swiss army knife applications that
have no rivets at one end of the blade to hold it together.
>>the concept of drag and drop between applications. There's no standard for
>>it. Hence, as I've pointed before, Linux lags behind Windows.
>
> There are several standards for it actually.
All of them lag behind Windows and do nothing more than confuse the
end user.
No wonder Linux is dying on the desktop.
>>
>>Pete
>
> This is a problem for people who like to drag things onto old
> versions of Netscape. It's not quite as general as you represent
> it to be.
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The State of the System Address
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:20:02 GMT
Let's get some more specific info here, shall we?
KLH wrote:
>
> The State of the System Address
> ------------------------------------------
>
> I just want to explain how I see the GNU/Linux OS. It is a system very
> heavily based on Unix and then extended with one of the various desktop
> enviroments to provide a modern enviroment.
>
> GNU/Linux has been said to be a good server OS. I have no experience with
> GNU/Linux on the server, so I have no room for comment.
>
> As a desktop operating system---GNU/Linux falls short in many way.
>
> 1. It has an incomplete graphical user interface. Many common functions
> are inaccesible from the GUI. This makes using the system more difficult
> than it needs to be.
Here you should take into account that development on a -complete- GUI
has only started two years ago. Could you please give us examples of
things you would like to see added to the GUI's?
> 2. Applications are not compatable within the platform. This includes
> such things as cut and paste, fonts, and widget sets. Cut and Paste means
> true cut and paste of any object---not just text.
A true standard cut and paste API has just been implemented a few
months ago. It's called XDND, and all the greater GUI's, like KDE and
Gnome, will have it implemented by the next version.
> 3. Configuring and installing of less common hardware is much more
> difficult than needed. This can be expected as GNU/Linux doesn't have vendor
> support.
Some hardware is harder to install, like USB-scanners for instance,
but some hardware is actually easier to install as well. The
hardware-support systems are quickly evolving as we speak. In SuSE
6.4, for instance, installation of a sound-card has become next to
trivial.
Also, you don't need a separate CD for every piece of hardware you
own, because as of yet all hardware-support is built in.
> 4. The X Window System requires more resources than equivalent Desktop
> Operating Systems. In addition, the X Window System has instability problems
> such as memory leaks.
X doesn't use any more resources than any other graphical API and X
isn't any less reliable than any other API as well. Bad
hardware(-drivers) can account for any instabilities you may have
encountered while using X. With the upcoming of XFree86 4.0 with DRI,
X is now actually FASTER than Windows and Mac, especially when used
distributed over a network.
> 5. Some common desktop applications are either missing (e.g., desktop
> publishing) or sorely missing in functionality (e.g., vector drawing apps).
Desktop publishing: KWord. The first stable release should come out in
july or august, along with KDE2.
I don't know about those vd-apps, though.
> 6. The GUI lacks consistancy in almost every way. The look and feel,
> keybindings, documentation system, and installation routines can change from
> application. This is due to Bazaar-style development.
Look and feel is consistent from API to API, as are keybindings and
documentation system.
There are actually only three of four different installation-routines.
I can mention RPM-packaging, DEB-packaging, and of course Tarballs
with source-code.
> On the plus side, the GNU/Linux has the following key advantages that the
> competition has yet to offer.
>
> 1. Much of the GNU/Linux operating system is free software, giving the
> users the same rights as the developers or software vendor.
The free software advantage is exactly why Linux has continued to make
it on the market. If there hadn't been free software, there hadn't
been software at all.
> 2. The average GNU/Linux operating system comes preinstalled with at
> least 4 or five programming languages. This allows the user flexibility in
> configuring his or her enviroment for more esoteric circumstances.
Correct. Some people don't actually like this, however. It makes Linux
use more disk-space than absolutely necessary. You never know when
you'll need them, though.
> 3. Sane development. The GNU/Linux undergoes very dynamic development so
> that if a component causes the user stability problems, the user can often
> upgrade to a more stable component. In addition, most GNU/Linux applications
> make stark distinction between stable and instable components.
That's right. You can have a stable system, or you can have a
'bleeding edge'-system. Your choice entirely.
> 4. The X Window System is mostly network transparent.
You can leave the word 'mostly'.
> 5. The leading desktop enviroments have or will have a theming capability
> standard with the software. This allows the user to theme his enviroment to
> his tastes.
Correct. No comment.
> 6. The average GNU/Linux application is smaller and more narrow in
> functionality than similar applications on other platforms. Instead, much
> development is reused in many applications. This standard for Unix in
> general but for GNU/Linux this e
The idea behind Unix/Linux-software IS to have smaller apps, which all
work together. Many people coming from the Windows-environment don't
like to use the Gimp, simply because it doesn't fill the entire screen
on startup. To them, it looks like a simple little app, which it isn't
when you take a closer look. To bad the Windows-users don't do this,
and say stupid stuff like "Gimp SUX", without ever trying to use it
first.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: windoze 9x, what a piece of shit!
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:20:25 GMT
You have cornered one of the premier Lino-Wacko's and tue to form,
just like a rat he attacks.
The truth really seems to bother some of these LinoNuts. I think half
of them are one step away from the tail of the Hale Bopp Comet.
On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 22:10:52 GMT,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin) wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Go away Troll.
>
>Nope. I stand by what I've said. I looked through Gimp and there is no
>print option on the menu.
>
>> You've used up any benefit of the doubt you ever had coming to you.
>
>Pah! There never was any on _your_ part, you started bashing me the moment
>I appeared. Oh yes, and what did you call me once, a "lying sack of shit"
>was it?
>
>I'm not lying, I'm telling you the truth. The fact is you don't want to
>hear the truth.
>
>Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: How many years for Linux to catch up to NT on the desktop ?
From: John Culleton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 12:19:48 -0700
Linux won't catch Windoze because it is not aimed at the windoze
market. Most apps, including most games, are written for windoze
first and for Linux later if at all. Installation of Linux
requires more of a hands-on approach than windoze. And windoze is
preinstaled on 99% of Intel and AMD computers anyhow. So every
schoolchild and every secretary will continue to use windoze.
(My local political action group makes special effort to
accommodate me. I am the only one without MSWord.)
Linux may indeed challenge windoze in the server market. There
its technical superiorities and greater reliability shine, and
its lack of applications and lack of dumb user friendliness are
not relevant.
Now about that command line interface. Pros have no problem with
it. Amateurs and beginners can just do everything from the Linux
desktop if they want.
Linux will continue to grow as a superior server platform and as
the OS of choice for the cognoscenti. It won't catch windoze in
terms of number of users. It is already technically superior in
most respects.
I'm happy with it. But then I am a superannuated computer nerd.
John Culleton ---------> Please visit http://ccpl.carr.org/~john/
My Linux Slackware system on Tuesday June 6 2000 at 3:21pm
up 23 days, 16 hours 59 mins since last reboot ;-)
* 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]
Subject: Re: windoze 9x, what a piece of shit!
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:22:18 GMT
Typical Linux...You need all of the add ons to perform basic
functions.
"Sir, would you like 4 tires with that new Corvette or will you take
the stock model"?
What a joke....
On 6 Jun 2000 08:33:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Pete Goodwin) wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote in
><8hhukj$3b8$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>Gimp has an interface to do whatever you want to an image
>>from within it. If you want to print, get the print plug-in:
>> http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/
>
>Aha... so, by default, Gimp does not have print? Do you need this plugin to
>print? So that might explain why my version of Gimp does not have print on
>the menu?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: windoze 9x, what a piece of shit!
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:24:44 GMT
I'd check for you but I just deep sixed Linsux to free up a drive so I
can install Windows 2k later tonite. No need to waste 10 gig on a
brain dead, antique, unsupported operating system like Linsux.
I'll be sure and let ya'll know how it went. I don't anticipate any
troubles though.
On 6 Jun 2000 08:31:59 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Pete Goodwin) wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bart Oldeman) wrote in
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>Right click on a picture. Click on "file". And what is there down that
>>submenu? "Mail image" and then? Surprise.
>
>Not on my menu.
>
>>GIMP's central menu is just that. If it would have a print option, it
>>would need to know which picture to print. The active window would be the
>>obvious choice, but what if focus follows mouse? It wouldn't make sense.
>>Hence (I think) the print decision is made locally for a picture.
>
>That's what I was expecting. Except the print item is not there.
>
>>Linux and Windows are different things. It shows that it takes you a lot
>>of time to get used to Linux. Similarly, I could never get used to
>>Windows.
>
>It's got nothing to do with Windows and Linux being different things. I
>went through the entire Gimp menu, on both it's main menu and its picture
>window. Print is not there.
------------------------------
From: "Yannick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Time to prove it's not just words
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:27:10 GMT
Giuliano Colla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit dans le message :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Yannick wrote:
> > If I was under NT, this is what I would have done : take ownership of the
> > files, give myself inherited "change permissions (P)" and
> > "take ownership (O)" permissions to all files.
> > The ownership prevents the sysadmins or anybody else from removing
> > my control over those files by mistake (Which happened once to me
> > under linux and the sysadmins had all left for lunch), because ownership
> > is quite separate from permissions. The P and O permissions allow
> > me to regain control on newly created files unless the created file's
> > permissions are changed to remove my rights on them.
> > And all of this does not interfere with the access permissions scheme on
> > the directories, because these are ACLs.
>
> If under NT sysadmin cannot remove your control over those
> files, it is an NT flaw.
The sysadmin under NT _can_ remove my control of the files.
But the fact is that under NT ownership and access permissions
are two separate things, only the owner does not need to have
"change permissions" (P) to change the permissions for him or
anyone else on his files/dirs.
Which leads to the fact that the ownership of the file is not needed to
control permissions. You either need to have P access, or be owner, or sysadmin,
to change the permissions on a file. Which means that most of the time
you don't need to take ownership.
Only case when a sysadmin has to take ownership is when he has not been allowed to
access
some files (which would not be the case in my example) that he wants to control.
So, _yes_ he can control all files. But taking ownership in order to do so will not
be needed in most cases. Therefore, being owner of my files, I'm almost sure that
I will keep this ownership, and therefore keep control on my project.
If he wants to deny access to me, then yes, he can take ownership and remove my
permissions.
If I belong to groups that have permission to access the files nevertheless, then he
can
explicitly
deny the access for me, overriding granted access.
Yannick.
------------------------------
From: Cihl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Another ZDNet Story
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:32:10 GMT
ZDNet has made another article about Linux. In this article the future
look bright for Linux. It's called "The Coming Java-Linux Duopoly". If
you havent already seen it, it's on:
http://www.zdnet.com/enterprise/stories/main/0,10228,2581961,00.html
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Boys Club for Linux
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:32:25 GMT
I'm a Windows user NOT (God forbid) a Linsux user.
simon
On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 03:42:03 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(LinuxMaybe) wrote:
>Linux users are a bunch of sniveling little immature boys. Big on
>nasty comments, foul language, and wobbly arguments. There is a
>difference between advocacy and the smear campaigns you conduct. Here
>are just a few of the *many* guilty parties:
>
>Jeff carroll
>Charlie Ebert
>pac4854
>Chris Ahlstrom
>Terry Porter
>sandrews
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>simon777
>
>
>Don't get me wrong,, I happen to think Linux has a lot of potential.
>Unfortunately, the users of it are members of a little Boys club.
>Grow up and maybe your operating system will too!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Boys Club for Linux
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:32:53 GMT
Thank you
simon
On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 13:39:08 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Christopher Browne) wrote:
>Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Nicholas Murison would say:
>>LinuxMaybe wrote:
>>>
>>> Linux users are a bunch of sniveling little immature boys. Big on
>>> nasty comments, foul language, and wobbly arguments. There is a
>>> difference between advocacy and the smear campaigns you conduct. Here
>>> are just a few of the *many* guilty parties:
>>>
>>> Jeff carroll
>>> Charlie Ebert
>>> pac4854
>>> Chris Ahlstrom
>>> Terry Porter
>>> sandrews
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> simon777
>>>
>>> Don't get me wrong,, I happen to think Linux has a lot of potential.
>>> Unfortunately, the users of it are members of a little Boys club.
>>> Grow up and maybe your operating system will too!
>>
>>Thank you for your wonderfully over-generalised view of the Linux
>>community.
>
>What's interesting is that some of these are not "Linux users" at
>all.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Boys Club for Linux
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:33:21 GMT
You can swap places with me :)
simon
On 6 Jun 2000 13:56:30 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
>LinuxMaybe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Linux users are a bunch of sniveling little immature boys. Big on
>> nasty comments, foul language, and wobbly arguments. There is a
>> difference between advocacy and the smear campaigns you conduct. Here
>> are just a few of the *many* guilty parties:
>
>> Jeff carroll
>> Charlie Ebert
>> pac4854
>> Chris Ahlstrom
>> Terry Porter
>> sandrews
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> simon777
>
>Goddamnit, I want my name on that list, bitch.
>
>> Don't get me wrong,, I happen to think Linux has a lot of potential.
>
>You're probably terminally stupid as well, thus more likely than not,
>your opinion doesnt count for a pile of goatshit.
>
>> Unfortunately, the users of it are members of a little Boys club.
>> Grow up and maybe your operating system will too!
>
>Thats one hell of an argument you got there.
>
>
>
>
>-----yttrx
------------------------------
Subject: Re: The sad Linux story
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 06 Jun 2000 13:32:19 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > $ rm *>o
> > rm: remove `flsdkfj'? n
> >
> > This road is a dead-end; operating system developers have to draw the
> > line somewhere, so the most you could argue is that UNIX draws it too
> > soon, rather than later.
> >
> > Regardless, it is more a matter of taste anyway; while you may find a
> > 2-step deletion comforting, others would find it very annoying.
>
> You misunderstood.
>
> I do not advocate two level deletion (VMS doesn't have it), but I
> advocate a tool chain which isn't so brain dead that its gets so
> confused constantly. This couldn't happen in VMS because, oh let's
> see...
>
> (a) wildcards are not expanded in the shell (the biggie!)
And this has been hashed out time and again. On the one side, we have
people in favor of consistency; on the other we have applications with
little/no/many expansion features. I still maintain that wildcards
should be handled by the shell.
> (b) it is smart enough to find out that "*" is not a filename ("*.*;*"
> is). So when the shift key is held down for 1/10 of a second too long,
> you get a filename of "*>*;*" which will produce an error instead of
> wiping out your whole directory. This is because VMS has an actual
> specification (gasp) for what constitutes a valid filename as opposed
> to Linux's free-for-all.
That is nice, I must admit.
> (c) VMS won't clobber files; it will create a new version.
>
> This three ingredients (in this case) lead to disaster. All are
> extremely well documented problems, and without them this problem
> wouldn't occur. But Linux continues to do this, making the user's life
> as difficult as possible.
You can tell most shells not to clobber as well (although they do not
auto version ala VMS).
> Incidentally, Mr. Kelley, you have failed to respond to my message of
> 17-MAY-2000 requesting your interpretation of my agenda (available
> here: http://www.deja.com/getdoc.xp?AN=624384457&fmt=text).
I didn't respond because I agree with what you posted. Your statement
"though you are correct in stating that it is not technical" showed
that.
The debate twix the cathedral and the bazaar is young, we'll have to
wait to see what happens.
And, Apple is using the bazaar now....
> Now for a passage from the Bible:
>
> Unix aficianados accept occasional file deletion as normal. For
> example, consider the following excerpt from the comp.unix.questions
> FAQ:
>
> 6) How do I "undelete" a file?
>
> Someday, you are going to accidentally type something like:
>
> % rm * .foo
>
> and find that you just deleted "*" instead of :*.foo". Consider it a
> rite of passage.
Simple. Go get the backup tape. Use the -i alias for rm (I do it
with all my root accounts).
> Of course, any decent systems administrator should be doing regular
> backups. Check with your sysadmin to see if a recent copy of your file
> is avaialble.
Yep.
> "A rite of passage"? In no other industry could a manufacturer take
> such a cavalier attitude toward a faulty product. "But your honor, the
> exploding gas tank was just a rite of passage." "Ladies and gentlemen
> of the jury, we will prove that the damage caused by the failure of the
> safety catch on our chainsaw was just a rite of passage for its
> users." "May it please the court, we will show that getting bilked of
> their life savings by Mr. Keating was just a rite of passage for these
> retirees". Right.
Read the VMS end-user license sometime, I'm sure it revokes any and
all responsibility for anything that ever happens.
--
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]
Subject: Re: SVGALib
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:35:24 GMT
Another example of Linux lacking. You have to insert code in order to
take a screen dump...Pitiful this Linux is...Pitiful indeed...
On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 13:53:24 +0100, 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Michael Mamone wrote:
>>
>> I was wondering if anyone knew how to take a screenshot of a program
>> running via SVGAlib?
>
>Yep.
>
>http://fuji.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/edward/bmp.c
>
>Put this code in to your svgalib program. (it may be possible to use it
>in another svgalib program running on the same console but I haven't
>tested it).
>
>this does screen dumps from SVGALib in to (ugh) windoze bitmaps. Sorry,
>but someone needed it like that, and I thought I'd pass it on.
>Before you thake the piss I wrote it in 1:30 hours starting at midnight.
>The main function incules a couple of examples.
>
>
>
>Hope it helps.
>
>
>-Ed
------------------------------
Subject: Re: The sad Linux story
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 06 Jun 2000 13:34:03 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> As always, we can leave it to a Linux user to completely, and
> thoroughly, miss the point.
Blanketed statements like this do not help others percieve your
technical arguments; you come across as a raving anti-linux bigot.
If that's what you want to be seen as, then fine.
--
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+Java, the best combination of techologies
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:38:57 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) wrote in <8hj2ic$8di$1
@m1.cs.man.ac.uk>:
You raise good points, however the one thing that put me off Java was the
rock bottom controls you have for GUI applications.
Of course, now with JavaBeans this ought to have changed but these weren't
around with the earlier versions of Java.
Pete
------------------------------
Subject: Re: The sad Linux story
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 06 Jun 2000 13:38:22 -0600
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[snip]
> However, in a few months/years Linux is going to completely destroy any
> remnants of any other system, and there literally won't even be a
> possibilty of using VMS (or any other non-Linux system): my only choice
> in software will be Red Hat, Corel, or Debian.
I hope (and believe) you're wrong.
NT will not be going away any time soon, neither will (unfortunately)
DOS. Amiga just released their SDK for Elate/Tao, but it lacks memory
protection *by design*, so I doubt it'll even take off. Be recently
came out with version 5, but they use the BSD userland tools.
Speaking of which, MacOS X will be even more invested into UNIX.
Hmmm.
--
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] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: SVGALib
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:42:11 GMT
On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:35:24 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>Another example of Linux lacking. You have to insert code in order to
>take a screen dump...Pitiful this Linux is...Pitiful indeed...
So? How again would you make a screen dump at the OS level
while running a game like Doom or X-Wing or even just running
a DOS app like WP or 123?
>
>
>
>On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 13:53:24 +0100, 2:1 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Michael Mamone wrote:
>>>
>>> I was wondering if anyone knew how to take a screenshot of a program
>>> running via SVGAlib?
>>
>>Yep.
>>
>>http://fuji.stcatz.ox.ac.uk/edward/bmp.c
>>
>>Put this code in to your svgalib program. (it may be possible to use it
>>in another svgalib program running on the same console but I haven't
>>tested it).
>>
>>this does screen dumps from SVGALib in to (ugh) windoze bitmaps. Sorry,
>>but someone needed it like that, and I thought I'd pass it on.
>>Before you thake the piss I wrote it in 1:30 hours starting at midnight.
>>The main function incules a couple of examples.
>>
>>
>>
>>Hope it helps.
>>
>>
>>-Ed
>
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
Subject: Re: The sad Linux story
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:43:58 GMT
On Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:15:33 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 21:17:44 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (JEDIDIAH)
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 05 Jun 2000 21:04:02 GMT, Pete Goodwin
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Leslie Mikesell) wrote in <8hh3u1$18f8$1
>>>@Mercury.mcs.net>:
>>>
>>>>You omitted the reference to KDE applications in your quote.
>>>>What gave you the impression that Netscape is a KDE app?
>>>
>>>Nothing. It's obviously a hole in the whole desktop of KDE/Gnome/Whatever -
>>
>> It's a problem, but not quite the sort that you are representing
>> it to be. That demonstrates you to be nothing more than a Troll
>> that was never interested in anything but causing trouble.
>
>No it demonstrates that Pete actually tried the operation and pointed
>out the lack of consistancy between applications on a Linux system.
>
>Linux is still a hodge-podge of swiss army knife applications that
>have no rivets at one end of the blade to hold it together.
IOW you have genuine choices.
Motif just happens to be one of them not very popular with
other linux developers. Although, GNOME will be perfectly
content to interact with Netscape in Windows terms.
>
>
>
>
>
>>>the concept of drag and drop between applications. There's no standard for
>>>it. Hence, as I've pointed before, Linux lags behind Windows.
>>
>> There are several standards for it actually.
>
>All of them lag behind Windows and do nothing more than confuse the
>end user.
>
>No wonder Linux is dying on the desktop.
You are just delluding yourself if you think that.
--
|||
/ | \
Need sane PPP docs? Try penguin.lvcm.com.
------------------------------
Subject: Re: HTML Help files (an updated set of man pages)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Pete Goodwin)
Date: Tue, 06 Jun 2000 19:44:31 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donal K. Fellows) wrote in <8hihj6$oil$1
@m1.cs.man.ac.uk>:
>Are you willing to help get the documentation into better shape? I am
>sure that many people would *welcome* this, and it is a lot of effort.
>Also, the best person to write some documentation is invariably *not*
>the code developer who tends to be too close to their work to see all
>the places that need something written about them.[*] Similarly, the
>production of examples and test suites is also best left to others
>than the software programmer, and for much the same reason.
Probably not, sorry. I (like most other people) like to write code, rather
than try to document it.
Pete
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
