Linux-Advocacy Digest #113, Volume #31 Fri, 29 Dec 00 06:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: Could only... (eXistenZ)
Re: Linux, it is great. (J Sloan)
Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away" (Form@C)
Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away" (Nick Condon)
Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away" (Nick Condon)
Re: Linux, it is great. (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Red hat becoming illegal? ("billh")
Re: Why Advocacy? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Form@C)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Pete Goodwin)
Re: Why Advocacy? (Form@C)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: eXistenZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Could only...
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 09:36:01 GMT
In article <92feq6$m9o$04$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
says...
>
> But donīt forget, not rifles are killing, the guy at the trigger makes the
> problem. Otherwise Switzerland would be empty.
I Don't know the reason why, but compared to the US Switzerland *is*
empty.
> And deadly violence can
> happen without gunsmoke. If you want a real adventure, get dark skin and
> have a walk through Magdeburg in the evening. Itīs not a problem caused by
> weapons, itīs a problem in the brains.
I agree, but still I don't think that arming people would be the
solution. Far from it.
eXistenZ
--
After three days in the desert fun
I was looking at a river bed
And the story it told of a river that flowed
Made me sad to think it was dead
------------------------------
From: J Sloan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, it is great.
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 09:42:31 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
> What you're forgetting is that much of the work done on Linux in the last
> few years has been due to the comercialism of Linux. If that commercial
> support drops out, Linux goes back to crawling along at a snails pace.
The progress was certainly not "at a snail's pace" from 93-98 in
the pre-commercial era - it was still evolving faster than most
commercial OSes, due to the large base of talented, well educated
kernel engineers in government and academia who wrote device
drivers, refined kernel algorithms and did many man house of stress
testing.
> Without commercial support there would be no RPM -
That's questionable - and even if that were so, there would
be something much like it. Debian's completely non-commercial,
and some say their package tool is as good or better than rpm.
> no Linux S/390
Actually Linas Vepstas worked on the S390 port for some
time as a labor of love, and then when it became cool to
support Linux, IBM took the ball into the end zone. OTOH,
Linux is now part of IBM's strategy, and it's not going away.
> no Linux Alpha
Yes, DEC did commit some resources to Linux.
> no Linux PPC (at least on Mac's)
The PPC port was done totally without Apple's help.
Apple helped with the "Linux personality on Mach" version,
which was mainly of academic interest and performed poorly,
which led to the completely unofficial LinuxPPC port...
> no device drivers for devices who's
> specs are not open, no KDE2 (as there would be no QT), etc...
KDE/QT are excellent, but in their absence we would
make out pretty well using gnome/gtk instead.
> Many of the cool free tools you use are developed by developers on the
> payroll of commercial Linux entities.
or government and academia -
jjs
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away"
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Form@C)
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:02:29 GMT
maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in <92c704$pr1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Greetings all. I posted a question on this forum and alt.os.linux
>looking for the best distro for a linux newbie. The posting was
>titled "Which retail Linux distribution is best?" The responses I
<snip>
You may like to think on these points:
Suse
An excellent distribution but has a very strict package control system.
There are a number of golden rules which you *must* follow if you want to
keep your system working and stable: Suse Rule 1:
Never attempt to configure a program using any other tool if it is
supported by YAST (Yet Another Setup Tool) or by a tool documented by
Suse.
Suse Rule 2:
Never attempt to install software obtained from *any* source other then
the CDs supplied with your version of the package or from Suse's web
site if it is available for your version of the package. At least, not
until you *really* know what you are doing! (Note that although it
supports the RPM format it appears to treat the contents of the package
in its own way - there is no guarantee that a RPM will install if it
was produced by a different distribution - I hope that this has been
improved since the last version I tried - 6.3).
Suse Rule 3:
Always give /home, at least, a partition of its own when installing. It
is not easy to upgrade Suse and a complete, clean re-install is often
the best way to go.
It seems to be based on "lets build a really good distribution, but where
our ideas conflict with accepted practices, we'll stick to our own
ideas". In spite of this, this is probably my favourite distribution so
far. It comes with so many applications (which is a *good thing* - see
rule 2) that you are often confused as to which is the best!
RedHat
Much loved by magazines - they often put applications on the cover disks
in their own RPM format. This is not necessarily good, as the
applications are often unstable and/or incomplete! A very "high profile"
distribution but not one of the best - especially not for beginners. I
get the feeling that RH would dearly love to rule the Linux scene and
set standards.
Mandrake
A very pretty installation which AKAIK includes most of the useful stuff.
Some people think that is incomplete once you get away from running KDE
but this has never bothered me much. Really intended as a GUI-based
desktop machine.
Corel
Another very pretty installation but not easy to use at all once you
leave KDE. What it does, it appears to do well but it doesn't do enough
for many people. Seems to be aimed at the same market as Mandrake. I
would have put this in the "one to watch" catagory, but I'm not certain
about its future now.
There are many others, but I havn't tried them! I'm sure someone else can
give you more info on these.
Is this info of use to you?
Don't worry about "fragmentation" of Linux. It was never anything else
but "fragmented" because there has never been a single commercial venture
behind it!
Linux, if it is pre-installed on a system with the applications that will
be run, is excellent. Problems arise when (some) users want to change
hardware or software to suit themselves rather than to suit Linux. In
this respect all distributions are equal.
By the way, maximus, this is an "advocacy" group. You can expect a lot of
shouting and support for particular operating systems and distributions.
Not really a good place to look for calm, unbiased advice!
<ok. flame repellant mode on again...>
--
Mick
Olde Nascom Computers - http://www.mixtel.co.uk
------------------------------
From: Nick Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away"
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:03:53 +0000
maximus wrote:
> In article <92c704$pr1$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> maximus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> <snip all>
>
> I entered this forum looking for help
<snippage>
No you didn't. You came in with a bad attitude and a giant chip on both
shoulders. That's not an ideal way to get others to assist you.
So FOAD.
------------------------------
From: Nick Condon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Newbie: "Linux has come so far only to seem so far away"
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:06:03 +0000
maximus wrote:
> Only netted $150K last year (US dollars, not pounds your majesty)
*yawn*
Well I netted a million billion pounds last month, *and* my Dad bigger than
yours.
Remember, on the Internet no one knows you're a dog.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux, it is great.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:25:25 +0000
mlw wrote:
> PostgreSQL, a full relational, enterprise ready SQL database.
Does this have full multiuser locking?
> Star Office, a full featured office packages.
Hmmm....
> KDE2, a very good desktop environment.
But unstable.
> Windows may have more games, and support a few pieces of hardware that
> Linux does not, but Linux does almost everything, is free, and is more
> stable.
Linux on its own is stable, but Linux + KDE2 is not. You can't really
compare KDE2 to Windows, it's not quite there yet.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: "billh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,us.military.army
Subject: Re: Red hat becoming illegal?
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:30:36 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis"
> If you don't recall, it was PRECISELY because I *dared* to mention
> that historically, our enemies have considered our medics to be
> high priority targets in an ambush that got your (yellowc1c4's),
> Bill Hudson's, Dave Casey's, and V-(wo)man's undies in such a bunch.
Of course, you lie yet again. I never commented on the subject one way or
the other.
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:33:56 +0000
You're signal to noise ratio is amazing!
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Form@C)
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:35:14 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
<snip>
>>
>> > There is a tremendous amount of legacy within a Unix system.
>>
>> like the "C:>" prompt on a windows 2000 pee cee?
>
>the _CP-M_ C:> prompt in LoseDOS 2000
>
or the [Linux]: prompt on a certain other OS, which doesn't even tell you
which drive you are looking at or what path you are on (by default
anyway!).
<grin>
--
Mick
Olde Nascom Computers - http://www.mixtel.co.uk
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:39:22 +0000
Mig wrote:
> > Windows Media Player has customisable skins etc. and isn't expected to
> > follow the rules. It's a funky, glossy (i.e. resource hog) multi-media
> > app.
>
> It still is a Windows app and a MS one and they break their own design
> rools.
Microsoft designed it to fit in with the funky groovy stuff already out
there, like WinAmp et al. Or are you suggesting Microsoft should buck the
trend and do a grey-style dialog?
> So there is diversity since youre saying "different standards". Lets use
> Litestep as an example.. should their modules (or whatever they are
> called) use the standard way? This is similar to the KDE Gnome situation.
I don't know Litestep so I can't comment.
> They do.. even across different systems since i relatively easy could use
> a MAC and be productive with it... or are we actually talking about
> another kind of user?
GNOME works differently from KDE, as does from MOTIF as does from whatever
else there is.
> > KDE has one set, GNOME another and MOTIF another. I'm not sure what the
> > answer should be here? Should they all be the same? Should there be a
> > standard here?
>
> Hmmm... i personally think that more stuff generally should be moved to
> X11 or another subsystem . I dont think that file dialogs belong there.
I thought X11 is the base system. You don't put dialogs down here.
> Consitent diversity? I dont understand that.. or are you thinking about
> themability?
I'm happy with diversity - a different look and feel - but I want some kind
of consistancy in the usage.
> There is allways an equivalent app... not allways up to the same standard
> but there is allways an app. BTW ýou seem to mix Gnome and GTK apps
> together.. i think linuxconf is based on GTK and not Gnome.
There is no Linuxconf in Qt, or a KDE equivalent.
> Evything works here.. even a HP C500 digital camera and 950C printer ( i
> dont say that the camera works without probs - but it works)
Not everything I have is supported. Recently drivers appeared for my Voodoo
5500 and one for my scanner, but nothing yet that supports my USB hub.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:40:34 +0000
Roberto Alsina wrote:
> Not even. Linuxconf is multi-UI. If I open linuxconf through the
> web interface in konqueror, does it make linuxconf a KDE app?
But it runs with Gtk. There are subtle differences in the look and feel
that make it sufficiently awkward to use compared to a KDE app.
> I even wrote a KDE linuxconf frontend once. Not functional, and now
> totally obsolete and lost.
Why did you write one?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:42:14 +0000
mlw wrote:
> Run regedit?
I've been told recently you can run regedit from a DOS prompt. I've not
tried this (and if it's a WIN32 app. I don't see how it can work).
> I get a kick out of this. The registry is a binary database of settings,
> which can render a system inoperable, which can only be edited from a
> working system. Does anyone else see a problem with this?
Boot from DOS?
> In Linux, I can always boot off a CD and edit the config setting that is
> wrong.
As above, boot from DOS?
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:43:29 +0000
Les Mikesell wrote:
> Yes, the keys and values in regedit are meaningless and you
> can't see them all at once or easily diff the broken copy against
> a working one. You can at least read the files you are talking
> about linking - and you can use a tool that does the link for you.
You can diff a text file can't you? regedit can export to a text file.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:45:23 +0000
Craig Kelley wrote:
> At least text files have comments and man pages.
Do they ALL have man pages, I wonder.
> They're easier to backup.
regedit can export to a text file. How hard is that to backup?
> They're easier to copy in case you screw up.
How hard is it to copy a text file?
> They don't have silly entries like S0122-34203023-3023209402
I won't dispute this one, but then I haven't looked at where NT stores its
service entries in the registry, and under what key.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:49:24 +0000
Steve Mading wrote:
> : That's not diversity, that's just confusion!
>
> If they all looked the same, development would be stifled.
> The fact that the both remain popular indicates that there are
> lots of people who like one and lots who like the other. If one
> were clearly better for everyone, it would become more popular
> on its own and the other would fade into obscurity.
>
> Are you advocating destroying some of these guis to make more
> consistency? Telling their creators, "Hey, we're not going to
> include your gui anymore not because it's bad or anything, but
> just because we made an arbitrary decision for the sake of
> consistency. Sorry about all that work you put into it, I guess
> it sucks to be you." That's the problem - when you put it
> bluntly what would have to be done to fix this "problem", it
> suddenly seems less palatable doesn't it?
No, I'm not advocating one or t'other.
What I think needs to happen is for the "glue", the small stuff to start
working the same.
They can keep their distinctive look and feel but at least understand each
other. I hear drag and drop works between GNOME and KDE.
> : What you seem to be advocating is a set of three distinctly different
> : ways of doing GUI on a desktop. It's a bit of mess because you can't
> : drag and drop between those three styles, you can't expect standard
> : dialogs to even _look_ the same (take a look at gv for instance) let
> : alone give the user a chance to expect things in similar places.
>
> I cut and paste between xterms and gnome terms and kde terms a lot.
> I don't understand.
Take a look at a KDE open file dialog.
Take a look at a GNOME open file dialog.
Take a look at a MOTIF one...
Take a look at a gv one...
They are all different, they have different features etc. That's where you
need some kind of consistancy.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:50:54 +0000
Steve Mading wrote:
> : S and K are easy. But, what about the sequence number? What should it
> : be? 00 or 99? How can I tell? Which one should run before another? Oh,
> : so I go look it up in the manual, it really is that obvious!
>
> They happen in order, duh. (01 before 02 before 03...before 98 before 99)
>
> Or would you rather have it automagically figure out based on the system
> guessing what those files are trying to do? That's a disaster waiting
> to happen - because when it gets it wrong (and it WILL), you can't
> fix it.
My point was - for example, should NFS be started before TCP/IP? If NFS
depends on TCP/IP and it breaks without it, setting arbitrary sequence
numbers breaks startup.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:52:24 +0000
Joseph T. Adams wrote:
> That's probably up to you.
>
> If your service depends on another one, then, obviously, run it after
> the one it depends on, and shut down in reverse order.
>
> Otherwise, it doesn't matter.
And how do I know what the order is from staring at the directory? It's not
obvious is it!
Yes, I know, go and RTFM.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
From: Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 10:57:03 +0000
Aaron R. Kulkis wrote:
> If in doubt, LEAVE THE SEQUENCE NUMBERS ALONE!
And what happens when YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SEQUENCE NUMBER SHOULD BE?
Guess it?
Take a stab?
Watch your system start, and the daemon you wanted, where is it?
> > 00 or 99? How can I tell? Which one should run before another?
>
> If you're adding a new product (like, say, a database engine), then
> that product's Administrative Manual will tell you how to number it.
Ah yes, RTFM.
> Is reading THAT painful?
It is when you can't find it. I went looking for where to put smb in the
startup. All the manuals I went through did not mention it.
> At least with Unix, there's a definite way that YOU can control
> what starts up at boot up, and in what sequence it happens.
And what happens when one daemon depends another. Do I have control then?
Does it NOT WORK!
> Pooooooooor little Pete...
> he's so confused by having a CHOICE to CONTROL how a system boots up....
See above.
--
Pete, running KDE2 on Linux Mandrake 7.2
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Why Advocacy?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Form@C)
Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2000 11:02:08 GMT
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
<snip>
>
>Unix/Linux, in its present form, is capable of replacing ALL of
>Win(lose)dows simply by porting apps.
>
Then why are we not flooded with decent apps from the windows side? Could
it be that (kernel+XFree86+destop manager of your choice) and Windows are
*not* quite so similar as you would have us believe? Even relatively simple
stuff, like the Agent offline news/mail reader, doesn't have an equal under
Linux. There are one or two which come close (notably running under Gnome
rather than KDE), but none so stable and easy to use.
Your argument must, then, apply to porting DOS applications over to Linux.
But there's no point in that as no decent DOS applications have been
written for years!
I'm sure that, if there was any money to be made out of it, software
developers for windows would be porting stuff as fast as possible. Perhaps
it is the "free" software idea that causes the problem then. If we arn't
willing to pay for the software then we can't have it! Without paying for
it you arn't going to get the development needed to get really well-
designed software packages. With all the goodwill in the world, the Linux
system would appear to be incapable of a complete takeover from Windows for
just this reason.
The free software system is great. Packages like Wordstar, Star Office etc
show the way in which things *could* go but neither of these is dependent
on Linux for its ongoing development costs. At best, Linux can only leach
this sort of stuff from other OSs at the moment.
Come on, be real. Linux is a *server* OS. It is extremely good as a server
OS. Let it *be* a server OS. It was never, ever, designed as a platform on
which to run ordinary user applications (just ask Linus - it wasn't even
designed as a server OS, but it's based on one) and it shouldn't be treated
as if it was.
<I'm not replying to flames on this post. Don't bother.>
--
Mick
Olde Nascom Computers - http://www.mixtel.co.uk
------------------------------
** 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 by posting to comp.os.linux.advocacy.
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
******************************
