Linux-Advocacy Digest #335, Volume #30 Mon, 20 Nov 00 23:13:04 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux + KDE2 + hello world = 8( ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Corel To Dump Linux? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux? (mlw)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Which distribution do I get? (T)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
Re: Of course, there is a down side... (Mike Byrns)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Linux + KDE2 + hello world = 8(
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 03:30:16 GMT
No.
I am admitting I am not a programming geek and could care less about
wasting my time writing in hieroglyphics that only another geek could
love.
And BTW the original poster of the message, you know the one who
couldn't get that piece of CS 101 to work "IS" a programmer, so
possibly you should explain klined.h to him instead because I don't
know what the hell you are even talking about.
claire
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000 20:02:03 -0500, Matt Gaia
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>*thinks* *scratches head* _Why_ would you need klined.h or klineedit.h when
>programming something like "Hello World"? It's a fairly simple programming
>101 bit of knowledge. C = gcc and stdio.h, and c++ = g++ and iostream.h .
>Or are you just proving to the rest of COLA your lack of programming skills
>too, Claire? :P
>
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Damm. That's the only C program I know and even "I" could make it work
>> under Borland's Turbo-C and later Turbo C++.
>>
>> Looks like you better read the "Where are my Libraries"
>> How-to :)
>>
>>
>> claire
>>
>>
>
>
>
>-----= 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! =-----
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Corel To Dump Linux?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 03:31:02 GMT
What a spin!
You should be working for the Gore campaign.
claire
On Tue, 21 Nov 2000 02:24:08 GMT, sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>They are looking to sell linux to raise enough money to save the
>company. Seems they see a great value in Linux, if it can be used to
>save the company.
>
>
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (xza) wrote:
>> Looks like Corel is trying to cut it`s loses and dump
>> the Linux albatross around it`s neck.
>> http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2656226,00.html
>>
>http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-3785993.html?tag=st.ne.1002.thed.ni
>>
>>
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: OT: Could someone explain C++ phobia in Linux?
Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2000 22:37:05 -0500
Russ Lyttle wrote:
>
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Nov 2000 12:17:52 -0500, mlw wrote:
> > >Russ Lyttle wrote:
> >
> > >If one were to time the execution of the code, it is possible that the
> > >C++ example will be faster because printf and its varients parse strings
> > >one character at a time, where as iostreams will accept a string
> > >parameter. Still, the end result is that the code snippet you present
> > >has nothing to do with C++, but of different designs. There was no
> > >reason one should have to code the C++ example any differently than the
> > >C example.
> >
> > There's a bunch of other points the example doesn't address:
> >
> > (*) The iostreams do much more than printf. The difference would decrease
> > somewhat if the C program used more of the functionality that iostreams
> > and strings make trivial.
> >
> iostreams are C++. printf is C. You can't use iostreams in a C program
> and you can't use printf in C++ program. You can use printf in a C
> program disguised as a C++ program though.
Where do you get that? printf is very much part of C++, if you think
otherwise, you are very very confused.
> .
> > (*) The difference does not increase proportional to program size. In fact
> > the fact that C++ has destructors and a bunch of useful functionality
> > in the string and stream classes could result in less code that is
> > "inlined-by-hand". In any case, it seems doubtful that the size
> > difference in favour of C would outweigh the safety of iostreams
> > in a nontrivial program (unless size is *extremely* critical)
> >
> Depends. In a kernel, the speed trade off is critical. In the TV
> example, size is critical with speed a close second. In both, safety is
> better in C due to tigher control over the compiler.
Suffice to say, I have made mention of much C++ code I have done in
kernel space. Often code can be tighter and more efficient with a
virtual function than with a switch table. C++ can make more efficient
code. For instance:
switch(object->type)
{
case TYPE_PCIDMA:
...
case TYPE_ISADMA:
...
case TYPE_ISABUS:
...
}
vs
DmaObject->HandleEvent(...)
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 03:35:18 GMT
Tom Wilson wrote:
> "JS/PL" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Goldhammer wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >
> > > > > > Why use a junky editor such as notepad on Linux when there are
> > > > > >so many better editors available?
> > > > >
> > > > > If I want a quick & dirty text editor, notepad is my choice.
> > > >
> > > > If I want a quick and dirty gui text editor under windows,
> > > > I'll download a decent one.
> > > >
> > > > It's beyond my understanding how MS, a billion+ dollar
> > > > company, can ship an OS with such a shit default text
> > > > editor. With all their massive resources, they still
> > > > haven't ever provided the user with basic text editor
> > > > fuctionality.
> > >
> > >
> > > That's because Micro-sheep are too stupid to demand better.
> >
> > It's an operaiting system, not a text editor.
> > The second that they include a text editor with any advanced fuctionality
> > whatsoever the ant-ms crowd will start weeping and wailing that they're
> > trying to put the little guy making a text editor out of business.
>
> Didn't seem to stop them where Browsers were concerned...
You didn't have a text editor manufacturer claiming that their text editor was
going to make the operating system irrelevant either.
I think Fred Langa but it very well when he said:
"Netscape (one of the main witnesses against Microsoft) was once the undisputed
king of the browser world. When it was still top dog, it announced it intended
to add OS services to its already-dominant browser, creating a
browser-plus-operating system that would make Windows--- and Microsoft---
irrelevant. Netscape's Marc Andreesen stumped around giving speeches predicting
that Netscape would destroy Microsoft. With Netscape moving to make its browser
an OS, Microsoft moved to make its OS a browser. Microsoft succeeded, Netscape
did not. Therefore, we must punish Microsoft. (Huh?)
(BTW: Now that the trial is over, Netscape co-founder Jim Clarke is now telling
anyone who will listen that Microsoft should be allowed to keep the browser in
the OS after all. But that's another story.)
I can't imagine any rational thinking that suggests that a company must sit on
its hands when a competitor announces it is bent on destruction of the
company's bread and butter, mainstream products. When Netscape announced it
intended to use its dominant browser to make Windows irrelevant, what should
Microsoft have done? Sat still? Riiiiiight---*that's* pro-competition, *that's*
free market: Just sit there and let a competitor kill you.
But I guess that's what some of the anti-Microsoft forces believe: While
talking about being "pro-competition," they expect a company, in some
circumstances, not to compete; not to defend itself. That makes no sense to me.
I am 100% pro-competition: But note that being against your competitors is not
the same as being against competition; harming competitors is not the same as
harming competition. In fact, harming competitors is the essence of
competition.
Yes, it's a harsh Darwnian model, but consumers ultimately benefit. What hurts
consumers is when the government tries to protect inept competitors, enforcing
a "survival of the weak." Or worse, it helps ensure that the companies that
thrive are NOT the ones with the best products or marketing, but with the best
lawyers or the most political clout.
In short, while I do NOT believe that Microsoft is blameless or a paragon of
all that is Right and Just (far, far from it), I do believe the whole original
decision to prosecute under antitrust law was deeply flawed. Antitrust was and
is simply the wrong tool to correct the problems in the software industry; or
specifically, to right Microsoft's wrongs."
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 03:38:22 GMT
Andy Newman wrote:
> Mike Byrns wrote:
> >No Les, YOU need one with regex capability. You are not representative of the
> >typical computer user. Try something -- stop some folks next time you're at
> >the mall -- ask them what a regular expression is...
>
> Grog, that fire stuff is useless! Ask any of the clan. Have they heard of it?
>
> --
> Oi! Oi! Oi!
It's just that elitist attitude from it's proponents that is holding and will
continue to hold linux back from widespread adoption. Make jokes all you want.
Most folks don't do for being called stupid. Never a good way to make friends and
influence people and pretty damn ineffective competition.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 03:51:19 GMT
Frog wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Nov 2000 02:25:37 GMT , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
> >On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 19:35:43 -0500, Gary Hallock
>
> >>I rarely have dependency problems. And its a lot better than DLL hell.
> >>rpm will
> >>tell you whats missing. You can install multiple rpms at once and all
> >>dependencies
> >
> >Sure it will with some arcane description of a file or package that is
> >nowhere near to the name of the actual package (that includes the file
> >you need), so unless you happen to know what these things actually
> >are, you will never find them.
>
> Yes, MSVCRT.DLL is so much more descriptive and unambiguous.
That's a filename. There is a description as well. All properly written
32-bit Windows DLLs have additional information like the File Version,
Description, Publisher, Language, Original Filename (useful if it gets renamed
:-), the Product Name it's part of and that Product's Version. This info
alone can be used to easily ID almost any PE executable.
> And of
> course, products from Microsoft *always* keep the most current DLL, so you
> *never* have software that relies on entry points that don't exist any
> more.
This has been hashed about so many times that it's really lost any semblance
of humor. Properly written application installers do not replace newer
versions of shared components with older versions. So far I've not seen
anyone produce a relevant Microsoft application that blindly installs older
shared components. That's typically the realm of your AOLs and Netscape's and
such. That's OK though. They can keep on performing the equivalent of system
sabotage and Windows will replace their mess right along behind them.
------------------------------
From: T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Which distribution do I get?
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 03:13:44 +0000
I have a simple qestion: what distribution of linux should I get?
I want to design web pages, possibly host them, java programming, c++ (I want to learn
it), etc. I know practically nothing about unix or linux, so any good sources of
information (it's a pain in the butt to search through everything that comes up when
you search for anything on the net) would be GREATlY appreciated! Thanks
_______________________________________________
Submitted via WebNewsReader of http://www.interbulletin.com
Complaint against spamming pls. to: abuse @ InterBulletin.com
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 03:56:39 GMT
Tim wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 19:35:43 -0500, Gary Hallock
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > >I rarely have dependency problems. And its a lot better than DLL hell.
> > > rpm will
> > >tell you whats missing. You can install multiple rpms at once and all
> > >dependencies
> >
> > Sure it will with some arcane description of a file or package that is
> > nowhere near to the name of the actual package (that includes the file
> > you need), so unless you happen to know what these things actually
> > are, you will never find them.
>
> Actually, yes Red Hat and others have somewhat unfriendly names for
> packages.
>
> This is not a big deal ... to find netscape for e.g., you can just do
>
> #rpm -qa | grep netscape*
> netscape-common-4.75-5
>
> now with that little snippet you can do anything to the package you want
>
> #rpm -e $(rpm -qa | grep netscape*)
> will uninstall it
>
> #rpm -ql $(rpm -qa | grep netscape*)
> will list all the files it installed
>
> and so on
>
> much better than windows.
How's this better? More usable to the average computer user? I think not.
What's wrong with a well written setup program that autoruns when you insert
the CD? You know the ones that ask to install the program if its not installed
or run it or uninstall it if it is. The same ones that often offer to display
a release notes file that usually contains a list of the files installed, etc.
Face it, most folks do NOT want to have to enter cryptic codes to do basic
things like install software.
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 03:59:36 GMT
Anonymous wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2000 16:29:52 GMT , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote
>
> >I've never had setup.exe fail yet.
>
> Please be kind enough to tell us what planet you live on. But just to
> illustrate how infallible setup.exe is:
>
> 1. Had to install Win98 SE twice on a Dell Dimension machine. The first
> one hung just after the reboot. No indication why, but it worked the
> second time. If it'd been an upgrade, I'd've lost all the data.
>
> 2. MS Office 2000 Setup failed when installing custom components. One of
> the packages isn't part of our supported suite of software, so all its
> components were deselected. The installer hung about a third of a way
> through. (NT 4.0 SP6)
>
> 3. The Office 2000 Service Pack installer reported errors replacing DLLs
> and therefore reported an unsuccessful setup. Manually checking components
> indicated that everything looked like it was correctly installed. To be on
> the safe side, we had to uninstall and reinstall Office from scratch.
>
> I have others, but those come to mind first.
>
> >Because unlike Linux, I am installing one program. I don't have to
> >worry about 15 other programs necessary to make this one program
> >function.
>
> Sure, you just accept axiomatically that M$ is installing what you need.
> Ignorance is bliss, I guess. Baa baa baa!
>
> >Wine is irrelevant anyway. It will always be behind Windows in
> >applications support, much like Linux tends to be behind Windows in
> >hardware support, except for rigormortis hardware, which Linux excels
> >at.
>
> I notice that the M$ HCL still includes a lot of "rigormortis" hardware.
> Perhaps you should bring that to your puppet masters' attention so they
> can force the sheeple to go buy more advanced computer products
> (including, maybe some day, the M$ video card! Guaranteed to work with
> Windows 2005!).
>
> Maybe the philosophy of Linux is that the OS isn't so bloated and unwieldy
> that you need to rush out and buy a better CPU, video card, sound card and
> hard disk just to squeeze out something that resembles acceptable
> performance from your machine. Maybe the thought of being able to add the
> components you want -- instead of being saddled with everything some other
> clown thinks should be part of the OS -- is the attraction. Maybe it's the
> fact that you can actually do something that resembles security, instead
> of leaking your information to every skriptkiddie who knows how to query
> TCP port 139 or UDP port 137.
>
> Or maybe not.
I'll go with "maybe not" for $1000, Alex...
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 04:00:46 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Mike Byrns wrote:
> >
> > mark wrote:
> >
> > > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JS/PL wrote:
> > > >
> > > >"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > >> Goldhammer wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> > > >> > "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > "Gary Hallock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > > Why use a junky editor such as notepad on Linux when there are
> > > >> > > >so many better editors available?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > If I want a quick & dirty text editor, notepad is my choice.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > If I want a quick and dirty gui text editor under windows,
> > > >> > I'll download a decent one.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > It's beyond my understanding how MS, a billion+ dollar
> > > >> > company, can ship an OS with such a shit default text
> > > >> > editor. With all their massive resources, they still
> > > >> > haven't ever provided the user with basic text editor
> > > >> > fuctionality.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> That's because Micro-sheep are too stupid to demand better.
> > > >
> > > >It's an operaiting system, not a text editor.
> > > >The second that they include a text editor with any advanced fuctionality
> > > >whatsoever the ant-ms crowd will start weeping and wailing that they're
> > > >trying to put the little guy making a text editor out of business.
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > Certainly the text editors which come with the debian linux distro are
> > > far superior to notepad.exe which comes with windows. I like vi, but
> > > joe is interesting, and emacs is nearly an os anyway. There're stacks
> > > of them and all seem better than notepad.
> > >
> > > Mark
> >
> > How many do you need? There are actually three editors that ship with
> > Windows, notepad, wordpad and edit. To each his own.
>
> And each one sucks.
Did you ever stop to think what as waste of skin you are?
------------------------------
From: Mike Byrns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Of course, there is a down side...
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 04:09:08 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" wrote:
> Mike Byrns wrote:
> >
> > Les Mikesell wrote:
> >
> > > "Mike Byrns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > >
> > > >
> > > > > Certainly the text editors which come with the debian linux distro are
> > > > > far superior to notepad.exe which comes with windows. I like vi, but
> > > > > joe is interesting, and emacs is nearly an os anyway. There're stacks
> > > > > of them and all seem better than notepad.
> > > > >
> > > > > Mark
> > > >
> > > > How many do you need? There are actually three editors that ship with
> > > > Windows, notepad, wordpad and edit. To each his own.
> > >
> > > You need one or more with regular expression matching and substitution.
> > > How many of the ones included with Windows have it?
> > >
> > > Les Mikesell
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > No Les, YOU need one with regex capability. You are not representative of the
> > typical computer user.
>
> The typical computer user occasionally must do find&replace for a large
> number of items.
>
> Microsoft solution: Manual cut and paste for each instance.
What of "Replace All"?
> When I was at Kmart, Windows admins would routinely send files that
> needed such treatment to Unix admins, because in 30 seconds and one
> sed command, we could save them HOURS of repetitive cut&paste operations.
KMart Windows admins just about says it all. When you your corporate culture puts
UNIX ahead of Windows you tend to get shitty NT admins. Perhaps it's because you
nix-snobs treat them like second-class citizens? Perhaps it's because their paid
less? No wonder the only ones you can get to hire on and stay are losers.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
