Linux-Advocacy Digest #33, Volume #32 Wed, 7 Feb 01 09:13:05 EST
Contents:
Re: What's EF's explanation on this one? (mlw)
Re: Would linux hackers like an OpenS windows? (sfcybear)
Re: P2P Name-Space Project Need Comments (mlw)
Re: Linux is a fad? (Ian Davey)
Re: X-windows Doesn't Suck (Karel Jansens)
Re: I don't understand ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: The Wintrolls ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else (Mark Bratcher)
Re: Linux is a fad? ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: I don't understand ("Aaron R. Kulkis")
Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop ("MH")
Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop ("MH")
Re: Aaron R Kulkis (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: I don't understand (Bruce Scott TOK)
Re: Linux headache (Ketil Z Malde)
Re: Linux is a fad? (Ian Davey)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What's EF's explanation on this one?
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 07:21:46 -0500
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "Donn Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Here goes: when formatting a floppy under Windows 98, one can't do
> > anything else.
>
> Not quite true. Yes, the GUI is fairly well frozen, but non-I/O bound
> processes continue to be scheduled.
>
> This is an artifact of the DOS compatibility, floppy disk access goes
> thorugh the bios (this is what allows IDE floppies to be used without
> special drivers, since the newer BIOS's automatically patch the int13
> vectors to deal with it). BIOS drive access provides very poor performance
> because of the I/O bound locking. The same happens when the IDE drives run
> in "compatibilty mode", but since hard disk writes are so much faster than
> floppy writes, you don't notice the degradation as much (but you can sure
> see an order of magnatude slower disk access).
It uses the DOS call, which in turn calls the BIOS to format a floppy. Because
DOS is busy, the system is unusable. So, in sort, and despite all protestations
against, Windows is nothing more than a DOS extender.
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: sfcybear <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Would linux hackers like an OpenS windows?
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 12:06:39 GMT
In article <j_Qf6.3647$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > gswork wrote:
> > >
> > > Out of interest, having spent time time hacking Linux would coders
love
> > > to see the behemoth code that lies underneath Windows?
> > >
> > > It would be fascinating would it not? Some of it is probably
pretty
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > You misspelled "laughable"
> >
> > [Ever see Microsoft source code??? Most of it, even college
sophomores
> > would be ashamed to sign their name to. No wonder Gates doesn't
want
> > anybody to see it.]
>
> And how exactly would you know? You've never seen it.
MS software has such poor performance and such lousy uptime capability,
it can only be because the code is poorly writen.
>
>
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: P2P Name-Space Project Need Comments
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 07:31:34 -0500
I think in the world-wide-supercomputing space, which has been a dream for
many, trust and flexibility are the gating factor. SETI at home is pretty big
right now.
While I am NO fan of Java, it may be a better approach to create a java
framework which could be run in a 'sandbox' environment on a user's machine.
The obvious disadvantages are, of course speed.
The Advantages are:
You could access many more users with less up front development work.
A user can feel more safe about running a Java program in a sandbox than he
could about a binary.
If Java allowed access to three times as many users, and was only half as fast,
you would come out ahead.
Bill Chiu wrote:
>
> Dear Linux/Open-source Community:
>
> I'm working on a project to join together the personal computer owners
> of the world, to share their unused computing powers with one another,
> to share files with fellow netizens.
>
> I've done a little research to find a suitable technology to make
> sharing computing resources, and I thought CORBA is excellent for this
> purpose. In my understanding, CORBA supports multi-platform objects to
> call each other's services across any internet connections. I was
> looking at VisiBroker and I found its name service and clustering
> services close to what we need, but not enough.
>
> Let me describe what I'm trying to achieve with GnuSpace. In the
> vision of Object-Web, everything is object and they are
> interoperatable. In the compatible vision of GnuSpace, the objects are
> running on top of thousands of personal computers, and objects may have
> unstable life-cycle, the network connections may be unstable, and
> objects need to be able to migrate from PC to PC for reasons of
> availability and stability. Why build a distributed platform on top of
> this mess? Why not? It is what many companies are doing research in
> e.g. P2P technologies, and if the open source community build it first
> on top of personal computers, then this network belong to the personal
> computer users, not a few particular entities.
>
> I need programmers who are familiar with CORBA naming services. I like
> to start with an open source implementation of a new service, and also
> an open source implementation of P2P network. What I'm doing is
> building a CORBA complient name service using open-source P2P network
> protocol (e.g. gnutella). If you have even a cursory interest in this,
> or any ideas what what you might like, I'd appreciate your input! I
> welcome discussions and ideas to make this project great!
>
> Bill
>
> Sent via Deja.com
> http://www.deja.com/
--
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Linux is a fad?
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 12:29:57 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I knew Yanks were bad at geography, but that's appalling.
>>
>A few years ago, a Geography teacher at a college in Athens, Georgia (USA)
>asked his students to show the location of Athens, Georgia on a map.
>
>Over 50% of the studends COULD NOT DO IT (i.e. they had NO fucking idea
>of their own location)....pretty pathetic.
>
>And yet, the teachers' unions scoff every time anybody dares to question
>the performance of the teachers in the US.
You should know the location of your own town on a map long before you have a
geography teacher. It's not really something that should need to be taught in
schools. Your statements contradict each other slightly though, as clearly the
teacher was teaching them it.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: Karel Jansens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: X-windows Doesn't Suck
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 13:25:53 +0100
bigbinc wrote:
>
> Sucks is a bad word, I take that back. Any piece of software that has
> been developed over the course of so many years with the inclusion of
> different groups of people across the world doesn't deserve to suck.
> In my own experiences with my own Linux setup(RedHat7.0, Linux Mandrake
> 7.2), Xwindows and the Desktops have been slow and difficult to
> configure to my own liking. Under Gnome and KDE, applications take
> forever to load, large applications like StarOffice and Netscape crash
> (of course I can recover the system but still). LinuxConf may or may
> not load. After I stopped using Gnome(I thought maybe using just the
> wm I would get more speed) it took me forever to get the Window Manager
> (IceWm, fvwm) the way I wanted it. And after all that, I still went
> back to Gnome, because the window manager lacked the features that I
> needed.
What features did your windowmanager lack that you needed?
--
Regards,
Karel Jansens
==============================
"Go go gadget Windows." Crash!
==============================
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: I don't understand
Date: 7 Feb 2001 13:01:52 GMT
Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It seems to be a standard measure among winvocates and some linvocates to
> quote the number of things you can do at once to prove the OS is good.
> Fair enough, *but* why do some people claim thay can play several MP3s at
> once?
> Why in hells name would would you want to do that? The din must be awful.
A DJ friend of mine carries all of her tunes on a small machine running 4
18 gig scsi drives in a 36 gig mirrored array. (FreeBSD mirroring, not
hardware; its actually quite lovely). The control for her setup is a Thinkpad
running Mandrake 7.1 w/kjukebox; which can handle and manage many audio
streams at once without choking. This sort of thing is nessesary for DJing,
because you spend alot of your time playing with redundant and overlapping
streams.
Works great.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: The Wintrolls
Date: 7 Feb 2001 13:09:55 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> > "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> > news:95mgsg$hr5$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> > > Finally, you have people like Goodwin, Flatty and EF who hate linux
>> >
>> > I don't hate Linux. I just don't agree that it's the best thing since
>> > sliced bread on the desktop, and I don't agree that it's the crash-proof
>> > masterpiece that most Linux zealots proclaim it to be.
>>
>> Stop putting words in peoples mouths - Linux users rightly
>> claim that, as a Unix variant, Linux is more reliable than
>> the microsoft family of products.
> I don't have to put words in anyones mouths. Charlie Ebert and others state
> quite matter of factly that Linux NEVER crashes, and have said so numerous
> times.
They havent actually, unless referring to their own experience with their
own installs. Demonstrate that it is otherwise.
>> There is no basis in fact for this statement - in fact, it's a lot
>> more likely that it's optimized for xeon, or dec alpha.
> Linux has to install to the lowest common denominator CPU, the 386. That
> means the kernel is optimized for that. Some distro's will perhaps install
> a 586 or 686 optimized kernel later in the install process, but it will
> still be a generic one.
Alright, thats it eric. I demand that you actually get some experience from
something other than books (thats right, real life) before you continue this
argument.
And besides that, even if it WERE true that the linux kernel was optimized
for 386 chips (which is actually quite a meaningless statement if you know
anything about the kernel or kernel architecture in general) because theyre
the lowest common demonimator; its a hell of alot better than optimizing
the entire operating system for the lowest common demoninator of intellect.
=====.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Bratcher)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: MS to Enforce Registration - or Else
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 13:14:29 GMT
In article <95qsf7$13es$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Steve Mading wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Mark Bratcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Peter T. Breuer wrote:
>:>In comp.os.linux.misc Mark Bratcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>:>> Then there was the "agnostic dyslexic insomniac" who used to lay awake
>:>> all night wonding if there really was a dog.
>:>
>:>Nice attempt to end a thread by darwinizing it.
>:>
>
>: Not really. Just a lost attempt at levity. :-)
>
>For something to be funny, it has to have not been repeated a
>zillion times. The dislexic agnostic god/dog thing is a dead
>horse.
>
Like I said: lost attempt. With communications the way it is these
days, it's hard to tell an unheard joke. Sorry. :-(
--
Mark Bratcher
To reply, remove both underscores (_) from my email address
===========================================================
Escape from Microsoft's proprietary tentacles: use Linux!
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is a fad?
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 08:17:55 -0500
Ian Davey wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>
> >> I knew Yanks were bad at geography, but that's appalling.
> >>
> >A few years ago, a Geography teacher at a college in Athens, Georgia (USA)
> >asked his students to show the location of Athens, Georgia on a map.
> >
> >Over 50% of the studends COULD NOT DO IT (i.e. they had NO fucking idea
> >of their own location)....pretty pathetic.
> >
> >And yet, the teachers' unions scoff every time anybody dares to question
> >the performance of the teachers in the US.
>
> You should know the location of your own town on a map long before you have a
> geography teacher. It's not really something that should need to be taught in
> schools. Your statements contradict each other slightly though, as clearly the
> teacher was teaching them it.
Apparently, this was a "first day of class" question to see what kind of
people he had in his classroom. U of Georgia, Athens campus, it seems.
The sad part is...that he would even have to suspect that less than
100% would get it right.
>
> ian.
>
> \ /
> (@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
> /(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
> | |
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I don't understand
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 08:18:58 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It seems to be a standard measure among winvocates and some linvocates to
> > quote the number of things you can do at once to prove the OS is good.
> > Fair enough, *but* why do some people claim thay can play several MP3s at
> > once?
>
> > Why in hells name would would you want to do that? The din must be awful.
>
> A DJ friend of mine carries all of her tunes on a small machine running 4
> 18 gig scsi drives in a 36 gig mirrored array. (FreeBSD mirroring, not
> hardware; its actually quite lovely). The control for her setup is a Thinkpad
> running Mandrake 7.1 w/kjukebox; which can handle and manage many audio
> streams at once without choking. This sort of thing is nessesary for DJing,
> because you spend alot of your time playing with redundant and overlapping
> streams.
Computationally, it's a REALLY low-bandwidth task.
>
> Works great.
>
> -----.
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
H: "Having found not one single carbon monoxide leak on the entire
premises, it is my belief, and Willard concurs, that the reason
you folks feel listless and disoriented is simply because
you are lazy, stupid people"
I: Loren Petrich's 2-week stubborn refusal to respond to the
challenge to describe even one philosophical difference
between himself and the communists demonstrates that, in fact,
Loren Petrich is a COMMUNIST ***hole
J: Other knee_jerk reactionaries: billh, david casey, redc1c4,
The retarded sisters: Raunchy (rauni) and Anencephielle (Enielle),
also known as old hags who've hit the wall....
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
B: Jet Silverman plays the fool and spews out nonsense as a
method of sidetracking discussions which are headed in a
direction that she doesn't like.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:27:01 -0500
"Het Studentje" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > 1. People are just not interested in Linux, and I'm not talking about
> > IBM I am talking about Joe user who makes up the lions share of the
> > market.
> > 2. It's all about ease of use, compatibility with the neighbors and
> > applications and Linux fails on all counts.
> That's the reason I still use MS-Word for documents. But everything else
like
> web browsing, mp3's downloading, news groups, e-mail, is all Linux now.
Browsing: Very weak in Linux. Worst browser choices of all PC platforms.
> > 3. Linux is FREE for God sakes and it STILL cannot get any sizeable
> > market share. Do you Penguinista's have any idea what would happen if
> > Gates took out a full page ad in the Sunday NY Times and gave Whistler
> > away for free? There would be riots in the streets.
> I'm convinced that if Windows would be free, there would be NO LESS Linux
> users. People using Linux use it because they like it more than windows,
not
> because it's free. Did you know everybody using Windows has an illigal
copy?
The Linux users would still use Linux, no argument there. But, guess what?
The windows users would still use windows.
No change in the market other than marked increase in users running Whistler
on their PC.
> > 4. Windows makes things so damm easy that screwing with Linux is just
> > not worth the time even if one manages to get it working properly.
> So damn easy that there's nothing to configure!
Like most Penguinistas with tunnel vision, you just don't understand the
market.
> Then I hate windows. Why? I liked dos, I always enjoyed configuring files
and
> making .bat files to make things easyer. Always trying to make things
better. I
> liked dos because I knew what was going on and how I could alter that.
Batch files? Big F'n deal. You can still create batch files in ANY version
of windows.
Or you can write vbscript and use the OS scripting host. Either way.
> Then Windows came. You don't know what's going on. There's the dark
registry.
> Starting up you get "fatal error in registry", whell what now? If Linux
fails,
> it tells you what's wrong. You read a book, ask around and you can repair
the
> system.
Hey, Clue: Back up your registry. Done deal. All these Linux-Guru's crying
about this same problem.
Question: If you're an expert in a UNIX os --which entails reading until
your eyes bleed. --
Then how the hell did you *not* learn the basics of system backup and
restore under windows??
Can't you guys see how weak your arguments are??
> A few weeks ago I made the transfer from Windows to Linux. Because of
this:
> I was just working in Outlook Express. Then I clicked a newsgroup.
Suddenly my
> whole computer was frozen, the screen looked like crap. Then reboot. Now
> Outlook couldn't start anymore "error in msoe.dll". Then I replaced that
file
> with one from another computer >>> same problem. I finally discovered this
file
> wasn't the problem. It was something in the identity directory. I had to
delete
> it all and replace file by file by making the directory in Outlook and
then
> overwrite the new made directory .bxs file by the old one. This was an
> extensive job. Then I couln't see Outlook nor Windows anymore. Now it's
KNode!!!
Nice story. Excuse me while I find a Kleenix to wipe my teary eyes ...
Back up, back up, back up. Is this SOOOOO difficult??
Better yet, get a ghosting program. Clone the drive once it's configured.
Major problem? Format /Re-image. Done. Next?
KNode drops core on my system like a Park-Pidgeon.
What's your point?
> I really like exploring other Linux programs. It never fails. Almost never
> reboot. Do everything you can in Windows.
That's the difference right there. Some people NEED TO GET SOMETHING DONE.
You like to 'explore' -->waste time.
Different strokes, that's all.
> If you need MS-Word2000, just start your VMWare memory copy and in 10
seconds,
> Word's there, in Linux.
F'n vmware? That costs more than an upgrade to Win2k!!!
Your entire post is going down the toilet. And fast.
> > 5. Answer is StarOffice is garbage.
> All office programs have been tested lately: StarOffice won. It was much
better
> than MS-Word2000. It just takes to many system resources. I'm going to
install
> OpenOffice. StarOffice is commercial. OpenOffice=StarOffice, but then the
> source code is edited by everyone, just like the whole Linux is made. This
is
> becoming THE office suite. Much lighter than StarOffice is recourses, very
much
> more powerfull than MS-Word.
Where did you read this "test"? What a complete load of BS. If SO was what
you say, do you really think 1000's of businesses would be using something
that costs 500$ vs. something better that's free?
Yeah, I know, everyone else (the other 90% of the world) is an idiot.
yeah yeah yeah. Another mlw-ism
> > 6.Hardware support under Linux is a highly mixed bag.
> My computer: everything just worked, except for my scanner, but I can live
with
> that.
Gee. Familiar story. If it doesn't work under windows, windows sucks, if
same under linux, "I can live with it". Anyone see a condition here?
(usually cured with medication)
[the rest snipped in the name of sanity]
------------------------------
From: "MH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Wy Linux will/is failing on the desktop
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2001 08:30:56 -0500
"J Sloan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Interesting - I wonder if microsoft is getting desperate,
> sending in the reserves here... the quality of the trolls
> has been plummeting lately.
Question:
What would the Linus Fan boys do without these so called 'trolls'
Swap shell scripts? Talk about forks vs. Threads?
That's all fine and good, but funny, I don't see any of that in here.
All I ever see is "MS this, and MS that".
Linux Advocacy at its finest.
Without your 'trolls' your religion would have no traction.
Get used to it.
Troll.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: Aaron R Kulkis
Date: 7 Feb 2001 14:25:07 +0100
In article <95qcva$9bm$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Joseph T. Adams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Whatever their other failings might be, none of these folks are
>idiots.
>
>Flatfish/Claire/Steve/Spooge/whatever is a satirist. Annoying at
>times, but some of what he/she says is hysterically funny.
>
>Chad has tunnel vision. He seems to be a decent person except for his
>blind devotion to Mafia$oft and hatred of everything else. But this
>blindness makes most of what he says on this forum pretty much
>counterproductive, even to his own side.
>
>Pete is a fairly typical Windows power user who's tried to learn and
>use Linux, but gets frustrated at times.
What about Mr Funkenbusch? To me he seems the typical "IT professional"
taught by very ingrown hierarchies who appears to know it all to
ignorant outsiders (eg, management) but is all the same rather
completely amiss. People like this IMHO do the most damage in any PR
contest. All the sick tricks are there, and sadly, they work all too
often.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Scott TOK)
Subject: Re: I don't understand
Date: 7 Feb 2001 14:26:55 +0100
In article <95r35u$gk7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Edward Rosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It seems to be a standard measure among winvocates and some linvocates to
>quote the number of things you can do at once to prove the OS is good.
>Fair enough, *but* why do some people claim thay can play several MP3s at
>once?
>
>Why in hells name would would you want to do that? The din must be awful.
>
>Just wondering
Maybe typical nerdiness. But the ability to play several mp3s at once
is the same as the ability to compile several large codes, run a few of
them, and read and write news all at once. This many of us do
regularly.
--
cu,
Bruce
drift wave turbulence: http://www.rzg.mpg.de/~bds/
------------------------------
Subject: Re: Linux headache
From: Ketil Z Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 13:36:18 GMT
"Robert Morelli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> You need to put all that crap in because 1% or your customers use this
>>> uncommon hardware, and 1% use that, etc. If you just had a cd of
>>> drivers, like a normal OS, you wouldn't have this issue.
>> Yeah, there's a great idea: one driver module on each CD. This way,
>> Linux users too can have drawers full of driver CDs.
> Why put each driver on its own CD? You just create a single CD with
> all the available drivers.
Really? No kidding. Hey, I got a great idea, why not just put it on
the installation CD!
Oh, I see, you want the kernel modules to reside on a separate CD, so
that you can be promted to insert it when/if you need it? Sounds like
a royal pain to me, but hey, you could probably save close to a
hundred Kbytes of disk for every exotic peripheral you only need to
use once in a while.
>> Or are you saying that Linux distributions come with binaries on the CD
>> that are built against multiple versions of some library? Evidence,
>> please?
> There is nothing hidden in a Linux distribution so I'm not sure what you
> mean by evidence.
I would like you to point out where different binaries from one Linux
distribution use separate versions of the same library.
> If it's not due to redundancy, how do you explain that it takes
> 450 MB to load the kind of minimal functionality I described?
It depends on your definition of "minimal". Some people wouldn't
consider Gnome or XEmacs minimal. And I bet you have more space taken
by Emacs lisp files on your disk than by .so libraries.
> >> Red Hat 6.2 [...] trying to eliminate whatever I could. Still, the
> >> installation was something like 450 MB,
> > Then use a different distribution?
> What's that supposed to mean? Why should I expect another distribution
> to do any better?
Well, perhaps since they advertise as such? There are distributions
that fit on a floppy, you know. Their definition of "minimal" is
probably not the one you use, though.
> What do you mean by `bloat' if you don't consider xemacs
> bloated? Do you really think it takes 50 megs to do a text editor?
To get the functionality, yes.
> I once used a fully programmable editor that was written in assembly
> and only took up 50 k.
Then why not install that?
> Most of those 50 megs in xemacs are packages and functions you'll
> never use, taking a serious toll on performance as well.
Where do you get these quaint ideas from? In what ways do lisp files
lying about take a "toll on performance"?
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Linux is a fad?
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2001 13:52:34 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Apparently, this was a "first day of class" question to see what kind of
>people he had in his classroom. U of Georgia, Athens campus, it seems.
>The sad part is...that he would even have to suspect that less than
>100% would get it right.
True, I expect it's one he reused every year. You get teachers like that :-)
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
