Linux-Advocacy Digest #505, Volume #29 Sat, 7 Oct 00 14:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for? (The Ghost In
The Machine)
Re: The Power of the Future! (Tom Elam)
Maximimun Process Size 555Mb ? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop ("James Stutts")
Re: The Power of the Future! (John Jensen)
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?) (T. Max Devlin)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Winvocates and Linvocates: What do you use your desktop OS for?
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 17:10:50 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 07 Oct 2000 09:55:27 GMT
<8rmruf$tlo$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Aaron Ginn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Most of what I do on Windows 98 SE could be done with Linux (though I'd
>probably go bananas trying to get my head round some of it): EMail, surf
>the net, usenet etc.
>
>I am a Software Engineer, and I use Delphi to create GUI applications. I
>created a 3D scene editor for POVray, a public domain ray tracer. I
>created it for Windows because that appeared to be (and still is) the
>most popular desktop system around.
POVray is available in source code form, and I remember compiling
it once for Linux (it's been awhile). Precompiled binaries presumably
also exist.
>
>Delphi is being ported to Linux, and when that finally appears, I might
>switch to Linux at home. The lack of games on Linux does inhibit this,
>also the lack of 3D audio is another consideration.
Dualbooting is always an option, although in my case I haven't dualbooted
for a month and a half. (I only have two reasons to, and one is no
longer an issue, although I'll find out come tax time next year --
but the other reason is that Wine (www.winehq.com) doesn't understand
_The Wheel Of Time_ yet. We'll see! :-) )
>
>At work I develop audio device drivers for Windows. So, no matter what I
>do, my interest in Windows isn't going away any time soon.
I suspect Windows isn't either. If Linux could immediately and
inexpensively replace each and every one of the 100 million or so
Windows installations out there, without any sort of retraining,
application setup, or such, it might happen. But there is a learning
curve involved no matter what OS one uses (not to mention binary
incompatibilities), so switching is definitely indicated only when
a profit might ensue (from reduced costs) in a large company, and
only when the IT department or an energized group of users yells
loudly enough in a small one. :-)
But who knows?
>
>--
>---
>Pete
>Coming soon: Kylix!
>(I do not need the destruction of Microsoft to succeed).
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
------------------------------
From: Tom Elam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 10:51:27 -0500
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 15:03:43 GMT, Tom Elam wrote this reply to Charlie Ebert
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>But that growth spirt in the teenage years is a REAL KILLER!
^^^^^
Why can't your mighty, all-powerul, Linsux box even run a spell-checker?
HUH?
==============================
Tom Elam
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is
indistinguishable from magic." -- Arthur C. Clarke
http://members.iquest.net/~telam/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Maximimun Process Size 555Mb ?
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 17:19:10 GMT
G'Day All,
Righto, we run an ISP and have a Large Linux / Squid proxy box. We put
some more disk in, and our squid process begain to grow (this is
expected) - to this end, we bumped the ram on the machine up to 1Gb.
When our squid process bombs ouy (at 555Mb) we see
"xmalloc: unable to allocate 32768 bytes!".
After much trolling around lists / squid archives etc I just couldn't
find any (linux specific answers).
I needed to work out if it was a squid issue or a memory issues. I
wrote a small C program that mallocs 1 byte at a time. Malloc _always_
fails at: 576797824 bytes. (which is around the same size as the squid
process).
I have also tried intentially getting other processes to blow out
memory wise, and sure enough they all die around the same size. This
has been done on 4 machine (the ones with enough real memory test with
swap off too).
I have gone through all of the ulimit issues etc (all show data seg
size set to unlimited).
So - is there some kind of kernel limitation on the maximum size of the
kernel ? (if so where on earth is it!!!).
FYI: (main squid proxy)
Gigabyte Motherboard
P3 800 (100)
1Gb Ram
Slackware 7.0 (with kernal upgrade to 2.2.16)
With my little "memory test" program, I managed to stop it 1 byte
before the failed malloc - at this point, /proc/process_num/-
status
Name: test1
State: S (sleeping)
Pid: 15523
PPid: 10677
Uid: 0 0 0 0
Gid: 0 0 0 0
Groups: 0 1 2 3 4 6 10 11
VmSize: 568708 kB
VmLck: 0 kB
VmRSS: 568044 kB
VmData: 567700 kB
VmStk: 8 kB
VmExe: 4 kB
VmLib: 972 kB
SigPnd: 0000000000000000
SigBlk: 0000000000000000
SigIgn: 0000000000000000
SigCgt: 0000000000000000
CapInh: 0000000000000000
CapPrm: 00000000fffffeff
CapEff: 00000000fffffeff
stat
15523 (test1) S 10677 15523 10677 771 15523 0 141935 0 106 0 14 358 0 0
9 0 0 0 120640442 582356992 142011 2147483647 134512640
134514411 2147482400 2147481856 716493729 0 0 0 0 21486041
statm
142011 142011 77 2 0 142009 14193459 0 0 17 0
I have looked _everywhere_ but I can't even find mention of max data
size process limits.
ANY help at all would be fantastic.
If anyone has the solution, please mail it to me asap: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
All help appreciated!
Kindest Regards,
Matt Robinson BCompSci
ISP Dr Internet (Australia)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: "James Stutts" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why should anyone prefer Linux to Win2k on the DeskTop
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2000 12:30:11 -0500
"Osugi Sakae" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:8rmhqn$mhm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> In article <8rgqs7$o53$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "James Stutts"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > "Osugi Sakae" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:8ret4q$9cp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >> In article <8re8kn$cjv$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "James Stutts"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> >> I think a lot would depend on how they did it. Remember that the rules
> >> are different when you have a monopoly. Linux distros offer a lot of
> >> free software that you could easily download (for free) if it wasn't
> >> included on the cd. Because there is real competition between the linux
> >> distros,
> >
> > Quite a few of the distros aren't commercial competitors.
>
> Thanks for nit-picking, but whatever do you mean? Are you refering to
> Debian? Or are you claiming that Red Hat, Caldera, SuSE, et al. don't
> actually compete?
>
Distros like Slackware aren't commercial (far better than RH, IMHO).
> Can I assume from your almost meaningless response that you agree with the
> rest of the paragraph?
There isn't that much competition between the distros. Due to the
incompatibilties
between them, switching would be a full reinstall. You pick one (or a
derivative,
like Mandrake).
>
> >
> >> some will also make deals to offer proprietary software. You would get
> >> laughed out of court if you tried to sue red had for forcing you to pay
> >> for a bundled mozilla and netscape when you only use lynx. You can
> >
> > Would you? The problem with litigation is the precident it sets. What
> > you have used against your enemy can be turned on you at a later date.
>
> It can't set a precedent if it gets laughed out of court. Oh, you are
> trying to claim that MS's competitors should not have helped the DOJ,
> because maybe one day the DOJ will come after them.
Yep. The government is a troublesome servant and fearsome master.
>
> Even if I believed that, what has that got to do with the willingness of a
> court to listen to a case involving the "bundling" of third party free (as
> in GPL) software? Exactly zero, far as I can tell.
>
> >> download the whole thing for free anyhow, or easily switch to caldera,
> >> corel, slackware, etc.
> >
> > It isn't quite so easy, unless you enjoy reinstalling your operating
> > system.
>
> Isn't reinstalling the os one of Micro~1's favorite trouble-shooting
> techniques? And a major source of income for the company?
Why would reinstalling something you already have cause you to buy more?
How could that be a source of income?
>
> Maybe you are unaware of this, but switching from one linux distro to
> another is simple - much easier than switching from Windows to Linux or
> Mac. It may even be easier than switching from Win98 to WinNT. Unlike
Well, the switch to a Mac requires a hardware change.
> Windows, Linux usually has (or should have) /home on a separate partition.
You can (I do) have your work files on a seperate partition if you want.
Just
like Unix.
> No problem at all. Unless you really f**ck things up, you won't even have
> to touch your backups.
You have to merge the /etc, among other things. There's far more too it
than you seem to think.
I've been using Unix-based systems for ten years. I used Slackware at
kernel
revision 0.99. I've been there before.
>
> >>
> >> Anyone who actually paid attention to the court documents in the MS
> >> anti-trust case can tell you that MS did not get in trouble for
> >> including IE with windows. Rather, it was because of the lengths to
> >> which they went to get everyone using IE instead of Netscape. If all
> >> they wanted to do was improve windows, why not take the WinME approach
> >> - make IE available as a free download, and include it with some bug
> >> fixes in the next release of
> >
> > Perhaps they didn't see the need in making everyone download it? Other
> > OS providers bundle web browsers. Including at least one that is
> > written by them (Sun).
>
> Perhaps you didn't read the findings of fact? The others are not
> monopolists who are abusing their monopoly to get their browser on
> everyone's machine for the express purpose of countering a threat to their
> monopoly.
>
> >> windows? Instead, they spent millions of dollars to get everyone and
> >> their brothers to use IE _now_. Where is the economic sense in that? It
> >> was about protecting the applications barrier to entry, plain and
> >> simple.
> >
> > How so? IE is an open framework that is available to be used by any
> > programmer.
>
> Please don't waste your time and my time - if you haven't read the
> findings of fact from the anti-trust trial, go read them.
I don't accept them as "fact", merely the opinion of a single judge.
>
> The answer to your question - and this is in the FoF - is that Netscape
> Navigator threatened MS's desktop os monopoly by exposing non-Windows
> API's that programmers could use to write programs that would then be
> less dependent on the underlying os. They threatened to make the os less
> important. Remember, Navigator runs on far more platforms than Windows or
> IE does.
Netscape exposed APIs? Netscape is a monolithic application. What are you
smoking?
Netscape didn't produce Java, you know.
>
> (personal opinion)Nothing controlled by MS is open - more acurately, it is
> only open for as long as it is in MS's best interests for it to be open.
> This is true for most companies, but MS is by far the worst offender that
> a typical user will deal with.(/personal opinion).
You were obviously NEVER a customer of Sun or AutoDesk.
>
> BTW, are you saying that a Linux programmer could use IE's "open
> framework" to write programs from Linux (say Red Hat for example)?
Only if IE were ported to Linux.
>
> >>
> >> With the market share that MS windows has, and the corresponding lack
> >> of competition, they have no incentive to include any software that
> >> they don't absolutely have to. (Also, my not including any extra
> >> software with
> >
> > If the had this level of market share, they could raise prices. They
> > haven't.
>
> I have no data one way of the other. But, are you trying to say that they
> aren't a monopoly if they don't raise prices? Do you see that that makes
> no sense? Higher prices are one way that a monopoly might be abused. IE
> and MS Office are other ways.
IE is free. How is that harming the customer?
>
> >> windows proper, MS gives the OEMs a way to distinguish themselves from
> >> each other).
> >>
> >> And, with the market share that they have, almost any program they
> >> include
> >
> > A more accurate phrase would be "with the enemies they have".
>
> What enemies? Don't you mean competitors? I always thought MS didn't
> understand the difference between the two. Paranoid f**ckers, aren't
> they? If life is so rough, and their competitors are such meanies, why if
> it that MS has the bad reputation?
By McNealy's own rhetoric, MS is the enemy.
>
> Why is it that some winvocates claim that everything bad that happens to
> MS is the result of jealous competitors, but when a competitor goes out
> of business or loses to MS, it is because they were stupid and
> un-innovative?
>
> >> in windows is going to open them up to possible litigation. Adding
> >> winzip wouldn't be to controversial, perhaps, but who believes that the
> >> sudden interest in WiMP is actually motivated by a sincere desire to
> >> help their
> >
> > Windows Media Player has been around for quite some time.
>
> Please let me know if english isn't your native language. Otherwise, take
> a good look at what I said - "sudden interest in WiMP". I never said it
> was new. It has been around a while. And it has been a POS for a long
> time as well. No one I know ever even thought about using it before 7.0
Real Player wasn't originally designed to be a general purpose media player,
but was designed for streaming media from Real Networks own proprietary
servers.
> beta. Yet, suddenly, it is the killer app for WinME. But at least this
> time they aren't spending millions of dollars to force the whole world to
> put it on their computers. Wonder why they only did that for IE?
They can't FORCE the world to buy the upgrade. I certainly didn't and won't
buy it.
WinME is a toy. Win2k is actually pretty good.
JCS
------------------------------
From: John Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Power of the Future!
Date: 7 Oct 2000 17:37:42 GMT
Tom Elam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Sat, 07 Oct 2000 15:03:43 GMT, Tom Elam wrote this reply to Charlie Ebert
: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
: >But that growth spirt in the teenage years is a REAL KILLER!
: ^^^^^
: Why can't your mighty, all-powerul, Linsux box even run a spell-checker?
: HUH?
Spellchecker(s):
http://aspell.sourceforge.net/
Actually we are part of a conspiracy. Do you remember those shortwave
"numbers stations?" They broadcast, in a monotonous voice, series of
numbers. It was widely assumed that those numbers were part of a code -
for secret agents and such. When those stations started being turned off,
it was often assumed to be yet-another-example of the end of the cold war.
Not at all, it is just that USENET has become a far more efficient medium.
Some of us are now richly paid to insert what might be a typo or a
spelling error here or there ... but to the educated observer,
instructions are clear.
John
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 17:27:28 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Donovan Rebbechi) wrote:
> >> If you want to do systems programming, you'll have a hard time doing it
> >> in scheme, ML, Lisp and smalltalk.
> >
> >And this is because ?
>
> Mostly speed concerns.
My old Lisp machine at home has an OS completely programmed in Lisp.
It has a generic window system, an editor, a SMTP server, mail client,
a TCP/IP stack, DNS server, web server, large-scale publishing
system (with 10000+ pages documentation database), file server,
file system, a distributed object-oriented
database, C compiler, support for netbooting, X11 support,
SCSI support, centralized administration system, graphics
editor, print spooler, etc.
The machine has 5 MIPS speed and 40 MB RAM.
My new laptop has a 500 Mhz PowerPC G3 with 384 MB RAM and
runs Lisp 10 to 25 times faster. I'd say, if the
old machine had all this ten years ago, there is
no reason why it should have got worse in the last years.
Just the opposite seems to be the case: machines are
faster and have a lot of specialized hardware.
If one would like to write Unix scripts, the SCSH (Scheme shell)
seems to be an interesting choice. For complex applications
CMU CL and CLisp are a good. CLisp runs for
example a lot of the functionality behind YahooStore.
CMU CL features a sophisticated optimizing Lisp compiler.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: T. Max Devlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Because programmers hate users (Re: Why are Linux UIs so crappy?)
Date: Sat, 07 Oct 2000 13:52:20 -0400
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Said Richard in comp.os.linux.advocacy;
>Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>> THis is almost incoherent. It sounds like you want classes to be objects
>> because that's what you're used to. I don't see why it's essential that
>> classes be objects, though sometimes it's useful.
>
>There you go again, claiming that ease of use isn't an overriding
>concern in any large system (eg, any modern programming language).
It isn't. Its an important concern, but there are others, such as
capabilities and performance. But you're a 'high level designer', which
means you don't care about whether it actually works well, huh?
>Classes have to be objects so that people know exactly what to
>expect from them without having to memorize yet another factoid
>about the system that they already have to learn too fucking
>much about. Why would any sane person want to deal with BS about
>how to use non-object classes when they already have to worry
>about learning what the classes do themselves?
>
>When learning a natural language, do you seriously *want* to know
>about punctuation and conjugation instead of just learning what
>all the words mean and how to put them together to form meaningful
>sentences?
If you want to use the language well, of course you do.
[...]
>> It can easily be done ( and often is done ) in C++. I don't really care
>> for being forced to program in a certain way.
>
>Whatever language you choose, you are forced to program a certain way.
>Get over it.
This sounds like you're contradicting what Donovan said without any
explanation, which means you haven't made a point at all. Sorry.
>> >Oh, and wanting to use classes as objects does not require reimplementing
>> >every class in the system?
>>
>> Not unless you have a compelling reason to make every class an object.
>
>Consistency, uniformity, sanity.
I think he means a practical reason.
[...]
--
T. Max Devlin
*** The best way to convince another is
to state your case moderately and
accurately. - Benjamin Franklin ***
======USENET VIRUS=======COPY THE URL BELOW TO YOUR SIG==============
Sign the petition and keep Deja's archive alive!
http://www2.PetitionOnline.com/dejanews/petition.html
====== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ======
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
======= Over 80,000 Newsgroups = 16 Different Servers! ======
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
