Linux-Advocacy Digest #532, Volume #32 Tue, 27 Feb 01 17:13:02 EST
Contents:
Re: The Windows guy. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux (Steve Mading)
Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux (Steve Mading)
Re: Something Seemingly Simple. (Dan Pop)
Re: M$ doing it again! (mlw)
Re: The Windows guy. ("Edward Rosten")
Re: The Windows guy. (Craig Kelley)
Re: Mircosoft Tax ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Time for a Windows reinstall! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Linux--First Impressions from a semi-newbie (Scott Gardner)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (The Ghost In
The Machine)
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (The Ghost In
The Machine)
Re: Linux--First Impressions from a semi-newbie (Scott Gardner)
Re: Something Seemingly Simple. (Aaron Kulkis)
Re: State of linux distros ("Reefer")
Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ] (The Ghost In
The Machine)
Re: Linux--First Impressions from a semi-newbie (Scott Gardner)
Re: NT vs *nix performance (Aaron Kulkis)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:39:37 +0000
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Donn Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>>
>> "Steve Mading" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
>> news:97frbg$alg$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>
>> Hmm.. was I blind when you asserted:
>>
>> > :> Programs != Processes.
>>
>> ???
>>
>> Now, here you are claiming that Programs == Processes.
>
> I think a single-threaded instance of a program == a process in unix. A
> new thread of a program doesn't spawn a new PID, unless using fork().
IIRC a pogram is an object with the potential to be executed. A process
is a program being executed.
-Ed
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
Date: 27 Feb 2001 21:35:20 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Steve Mading wrote:
:>
:> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>
:> : Panzers go "blub blub blub" without a dock to land them on.
:> : Beachheads are not docks.
:>
:> By that argument, the Normady landings never would have had any tanks
:> in them, and they DID.
: You must remember...we BROUGHT our own docks.
Very true. And this makes your point about not being able to get
panzers across the channel rather moot. It could have worked.
The allies proved this later. Thank you for shooting down your own
argument for me.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Microsoft seeks government help to stop Linux
Date: 27 Feb 2001 21:39:38 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: First-rate pilots don't mean a thing when all the aircraft
: factories are bombed out. The day the Luftwaffe started bombing
: London (in response to an RAF bomber jettisoning it's bombload
: over Berlin), the RAF was down to a 4-hour supply of critical
: repair and maintenance parts. Both the Spitfire and Hurricane
: production centers had been under attack for several weeks.
The Brits were doing a lot of their aircraft production
overseas in Canada and factories they owned in the US.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Pop)
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Something Seemingly Simple.
Date: 27 Feb 2001 21:22:40 GMT
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mathew Hendry
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>On 27 Feb 2001 17:35:21 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Pop) wrote:
>
>>In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Mathew Hendry
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>>On 27 Feb 2001 14:11:47 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dan Pop) wrote:
>>>
>>>>However, none of your quotes proves that <math.h> cannot define PI.
>>>
>>>Nor did yours, but I don't think a rigorous proof was requested. :)
>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>Please elaborate.
>
>They would also rule out _PI, so they are incomplete.
Read the post again. The question was *explicitly* about PI.
Dan
--
Dan Pop
CERN, IT Division
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mail: CERN - IT, Bat. 31 1-014, CH-1211 Geneve 23, Switzerland
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: M$ doing it again!
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:48:18 -0500
Erik Funkenbusch wrote:
>
> "mlw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > Yes the above definition is valid for publish. The issue I have is how
> "open
> > source" is unpublished or undocumented? Since the source is the
> documentation,
> > how on earth can you support a claim that anything in Linux is
> undocumented.
>
> The problem is that these terms are overloaded. They mean different things
> in different contexts.
>
> For instance, when you refer to "an unpublished work", according to
> copyright law, it means you have no intention of making it public knowledge,
> no matter how many people you give the source to.
It means you have not published the work, as per your response: definition #1
> 1 To prepare and issue (printed material) for public distribution or sale.
An "unpublished work" has not been issued for public distribution. The fact you
may give it away to people you are aquatinted with has nothing to do with this.
It is arguable that if you make and give away (or sell) enough copies it can be
considered "published."
Linux is published. There is legal status of material posted on the internet as
being "published."
>
> While clearly, the authors of the Linux kernel intend for it to be public
> knowledge, they also don't intend for every function, even every function
> visible outside the kernel to be used by all programs.
>
> For instance, sys_geteuid16 is a syscall that's completely undocumented
> other than it's uncommented source code.
It is very well documented, one can say "completely" documented because the
source code IS the documentation. There is no definition of "undocumented" or
"unpublished" that can apply to the Linux kernel. You are trying to use your
own opinions about what constitutes "documentation" which are neither
consistent nor correct.
Just because you don't think source code is documentation does not mean that it
isn't. Printed source code has even been legally protected as free speech. So
you are wrong in every nuance you are trying to argue.
There are no unpublished or undocumented areas of Linux. Face it, you are
wrong, be a man, admit it.
--
The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time.
The terror of their tyranny, however, is alleviated by their lack of
consistency.
-- Albert Einstein
========================
http://www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:44:40 +0000
> No, it's completely different. Read the other argument. The other
> argument said (essentially) that "DOS pipes can't do everything that
> UNIX pipes can do, therefore they are not pipes". This argument is
> obviously inadequate (unless you use "UNIX pipe" as a definition of
> pipe, which sort of defines the argument into triviality)
If that's my argument you're referring to, then I changed it to:
A pipe passed the output of one process to the input
of another process.
This will not work under some circumstances in a single tasking
environment, but always works in a multitasking one.
This definition describes the functionality without mentioning
multitasking or UNIX, but it requires multitasking and fits the
definition of UNIX pipes quite well.
Under this definition, DOS "pipes" can't do everything pipes can do, so
they are not pipes.
-Ed
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The Windows guy.
Date: 27 Feb 2001 14:49:13 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > Nope. AmigaOS has "tasks" which are synonymous with threads.
> > > AmigaOS tasks all run in the same address space and have no seperate
> > > context of a process.
> >
> > I used to develop software for the Amiga. It has processes. It has
> > top. It has PIDs. What does the 'Proc' part of CreateNewProcTags()
> > mean? (Yes, there is a CreateTask() call as well -- but tasks can't
> > do many things that processes can).
>
> It's been a while since I did Amiga programming, and I no longer have my
> reference books, but IIRC, CreateNewProcTags, the Proc stood for Procedure,
> not Process.
Nope, it's process.
> In any event, Steve was asserting that Programs != Processes, so Program
> ID's are irrelevant.
That's why I made my disclaimer about jumping into the middle of the
usenet thread. :) I don't think there is any formal definition of a
"program" anyway.
> > > MacOS has improved in recent years, but still has no concept of a
> process.
> > > MacOS X will change that.
> >
> > A process needn't have it's own address space. That's how UNIX does
> > it now, but it was not always the case.
>
> The difference between a process and a thread is that process includes an
> address context.
So does a thread, it just happens to share it with every other thread
in the same process.
A properly behaved process under AmigaOS shares the same restrictions
that UNIX processes have; it's just that a stray pointer can nuke
fellow processses/tasks as well. I suppose they're fixing this with
the new Tao system, but I don't think many people care anymore.
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:51:37 +0000
> Preemptive multitasking, dual mode and protected memory are vast
> improvements.
I woudn't call them vast improvements, since they don't seem to work very
well.
Besides, doesn't Win311 have this when its running 32bit apps?
> These features are tacked on and the result is a shining example of
> "second system syndrome".
They were tacked on to Win311 to make 95. This shows up quite well
because you can tack most (if not all) of them on to Win311 as well.
> Backward compatibility often entails horrific
> design compromises. However, it is plain dishonest to say that it is
> "not much different" from Win 3.x.
I really don't believe there is, if you kept up with Win311 updates.
-ed
--
| u98ejr
| @
Share, and enjoy. | eng.ox
| .ac.uk
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Time for a Windows reinstall!
Date: 27 Feb 2001 14:53:01 -0700
"Donal K. Fellows" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Aaron Ginn wrote:
> > You do know that on UNIX a 100% full hard drive does not really mean
> > 100%, don't you? I've filled up numerous hard drives on UNIX writing
> > files a lot bigger than 750MB (the size of the image file that Nero
> > created). I've never had a problem with the system upon deleting the
> > offending file. Why does Windows suffer from this problem? I've
> > never heard of an OS that will fall apart when the hard drive is
> > filled up. If an OS can be rendered almost useless because a single
> > app filled the hard drive, that OS is a POS.
>
> I've blown up versions of Unix (specifically SunOS4) before now by filling
> up the log device. It turned out that the system wanted to log the fact
> that the device holding /var was full, but couldn't because the device
> holding /var was full. Shortly after, all services wanting to write to
> the log blocked solid due to the syslogd getting indigestion... :^(
>
> This was a long time ago though, and I've not heard of any modern Unix
> with this problem. Even the last release of SunOS4 didn't seem to
> suffer from it, though that might have been because of the local
> configuration, I suppose.
Most operating systems, even today, suffer from this problem (DoS, if
you will). Our NT server was installed on a 500MB hard disk, and even
though it had another 36GB of SCSI storage on other drives, the system
filled up with some huge print jobs and it wasn't very pretty.
Similarly, try running GNOME sometime under Linux when /tmp is full,
or run pine when /home is full... :)
--
The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead.
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Gardner)
Subject: Re: Linux--First Impressions from a semi-newbie
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:53:58 GMT
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 02:52:04 GMT, Brent R <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "Install" routines for third-party software aren't as polished. I've
>> installed StarOffice 5.2 with no problems, but Wordperfect 8.0 still
>> eludes me. All the helpfile says is to copy the compressed file to an
>> empty directory, unzip it, and run the "Runme" file. I did that, and
>> get a bunch of errors that directories could not be created or that
>> they weren't found. Not what I'm used to coming from Windows.
>
>Were you logged in as root?
>
Yes, I tried it as root. I suspect that the installation program is
making some undocumented assumptions about where I would place the
install file to uncompress it. Perhaps I'm not using all of the
correct switches on the "gunzip" command to properly re-create the
directory structure for the install files. Then, when I run the
install script, things aren't where they're supposed to be, and things
go downhill from there. There's no sense of urgency, since I have
plenty of other things to play around with before I worry about having
to make applications work.
Scott
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:58:35 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Peter da Silva
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 23 Feb 2001 17:17:52 GMT
<976600$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>In article <kpwl6.6147$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Seán Ó Donnchadha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> It's just part of the reason why blaming ActiveX for the security problems
>> of the underlying OS is like blaming the mailman for the damage caused by a
>> letterbomb. ActiveX is just a packaging format and delivery mechanism for
>> native binary code.
>
>Which is why it's utterly inappropriate as a plugin mechanism for browsers.
I will note that in ONE case -- at least one that I can think of,
anyway -- it might be entirely appropriate for ActiveX to be used;
that mechanism would, however, require the construction of a
sandbox in the browser (or a plugin attached thereto) that would
either emulate the code, or use V86 hooks to execute the parts of
it that aren't required to call the OS.
In other words, a solution similar to VmWare, or perhaps Wine buttressed
with some additional code to prevent the applet from doing anything
unauthorized.
Of course, Java does it better :-), especially since it was designed
with a sandbox in mind (the SecurityManager class).
>
>BTW, I'm going to remove comp.security.ssh from further followups. Ciao.
Probably a good idea. :-)
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 22d:03h:27m actually running Linux.
Linux. The choice of a GNU generation.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:59:37 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Shane Phelps
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Sat, 24 Feb 2001 22:18:22 +1100
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
>"T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>>
>[ snip ]
>
>Come on gents, let's stop bothering the nice people on css now that this
>thread has strayed way off-topic.
>
>They were nice enough to give Chad a Black Knight job, so let's not
>bother them any more.
Uh...dumb question, but what the heck is a "Black Knight" job? :-)
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- does it have anything to do with black and white hats?
EAC code #191 22d:03h:32m actually running Linux.
Use the source, Luke.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Gardner)
Subject: Re: Linux--First Impressions from a semi-newbie
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 21:58:23 GMT
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 07:39:00 -0000, Ray Chason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Gardner) wrote:
>
>>Hardware support is not as good as with Windows. My AGP video card
>>was supported under X using the generic SVGA driver, but none of the
>>acceleration options were available.
>
>What kind of video card do you have?
It's a Diamond Viper II. Like I said, it works fine with the generic
SVGA settings, but I had an older Diamond Viper V330 lying around and
installed it, since the Riva 128 chip was supported directly.
>
>>Likewise, neither of my two
>>high-end sound card chipset were supported. I've bought a used Sound
>>Blaster PCI 64 to solve that.
>
>Yeah, this is one of the major areas where hardware support is lacking.
>
No biggie. I didn't use any of the whiz-bang features of either my
Diamond Monster MX300 or MX400, like SPDIF output or four-channel
output, so one sound card sounds pretty much the same to me. The SB
PCI set me back $15, and if linux ever gets around to supporting the
Diamond cards, I can swap them back in.
>
>>My modem isn't supported, but I didn't
>>know at the time I bought it that it was a "winmodem", so I can't
>>blame linux for this.
>
>A few winmodems are supported (see http://www.linmodems.org/ ), but
>yes, you're best off with a controller-based modem.
>
>Your safest bet is an external modem with a serial interface; serial
>interfaces can't handle the bandwidth needed for a winmodem, and such
>modems perforce must be controller-based. Most (all?) USB modems will
>work if you have a 2.4 kernel. Many ISA modems will work; Creative
>makes one of these that is specifically marketed as controller-based,
>right there on the box, and sells for about $70. Most PCI modems
>won't work.
>
>See http://www.idir.net/~gromitkc/winmodem.html for the best known
>compatibility list for modems.
Planning on a 3com/USR v.90 external serial unit. They've been highly
recommended to me, and I'd rather just go for the old
controller-based, external, serial port solution.
Scott
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Something Seemingly Simple.
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 17:02:35 -0500
Chris Torek wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >The C compiler definition defines absolutely ZERO functions...only
> >the syntax for writing them.
> >
> >You're confusing the Standard Library with the language itself.
>
> Standard C defines two kinds of implementations: "freestanding"
> and "hosted". A hosted implementation is required to provide
> every standard C function, and none of them are required to be
> implemented in the way you appear to expect.
>
> Proof by example (which is flawed, but since you apparently use
> Linux and gcc, this example no doubt holds true on your own machine):
>
> [N.B.: I am "cheating", using the fact that I know
> that size_t happens to be unsigned int on i386,
> to avoid the normal #include <string.h>, which
> might otherwise use gcc's `inline asm' trickery.]
>
> % cat len.c
> unsigned int strlen(const char *);
> unsigned int len(const char *s) { return strlen(s); }
> % cc -O -S len.c
> % cat len.s
> .file "len.c"
> .version "01.01"
> gcc2_compiled.:
> .text
> .align 4
> .globl len
> .type len,@function
> len:
> pushl %ebp
> movl %esp,%ebp
> pushl %edi
> xorb %al,%al
> movl 8(%ebp),%edi
> cld
> movl $-1,%ecx
> repnz
> scasb
> movl %ecx,%eax
> notl %eax
> decl %eax
> movl -4(%ebp),%edi
> leave
> ret
> .Lfe1:
> .size len,.Lfe1-len
> .ident "GCC: (GNU) 2.7.2.1"
>
> Note the complete and total lack of a call to any function. As
> you can see, this C compiler has implemented strlen() directly.
> It does so whenever you ask for optimization.
>
> GCC is allowed to expand strlen() inline precisely *because* strlen()
> is part of the C language, on a hosted implementation. If you attempt
^
"allowed to be"
and "allowed to be" != "required to be"
> to write your own replacement strlen(), IT WILL NOT EVEN BE CALLED.
>
> For more fun, try compiling:
>
> return strlen("hello world");
>
> to assembly code, using "gcc -O". See what you get.
>
> (Of course, gcc can be used freestanding, but to do so, you have
> to give it the `free-standing' option, -fno-builtin. "fno" is a
> rather odd way to spell "free", and "builtin" a weird way to spell
> "standing", but that is what they mean, in the context of the C
> language proper.)
> --
> In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Berkeley Software Design Inc
> El Cerrito, CA, USA Domain: [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1 510 234 3167
> http://claw.bsdi.com/torek/ (not always up) I report spam to abuse@.
> Note: PacBell news service is rotten
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: "Reefer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: State of linux distros
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:07:04 GMT
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> skrev i meddelandet news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> You're an idiot. Kulkis made perfect sense (though I don't necessarily
> endorse the sentiment)
Naahh...aint that cute, Kulkis has got another little boy all to himself...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: SSH vulnerabilities - still waiting [ was Interesting article ]
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:03:52 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Craig Kelley
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on 24 Feb 2001 07:57:40 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine) writes:
>
>> I'm pretty sure one can even run a window manager "over the wire" (I
>> wouldn't want to, because my bandwidth sucks) and get reasonably
>> good results.
>
>Ssh into a box.
>
>Run this command:
>
> Xnest -query HOSTNAME :1
>
>(where HOSTNAME is some machine running xdm, gdm or kdm; ususally the
>same box)
Oh yeah, forgot about Xnest. Useful little beastie; with a little work
it probably could be turned into a really interesting scrollable widget.
:-)
But even without it, one can test a few things, I suspect. I
haven't played with it lately.
(But then, there's the issue as to whether we'd really want to
duplicate pcAnywhere-type technology. But that's a philosophical
question. :-) )
[.sigsnip]
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 22d:03h:34m actually running Linux.
We are all naked underneath our clothes.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Gardner)
Subject: Re: Linux--First Impressions from a semi-newbie
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 22:03:42 GMT
On Tue, 27 Feb 2001 09:11:34 +0000, "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> My biggest hardware gripe so far is that my network
>> card isn't supported under 2.2, but it is under 2.4.2. Problem is, since
>> I had to supply my RAID device driver during the initial of RH with
>> kernel 2.2, I can't incorporate support for my RAID card under kernel
>> 2.4.2, so for right now, I have to choose between my Ethernet card and
>> my RAID array.
>
>You might find that the card driver has been backported to 2.2, but the
>support might not be in the official kernel or RedHat's kernel.
>
>-Ed
I'm not positive what "backported" means, but it's not 2.2 that's
giving me the problem with the RAID card -- it's 2.4.2. It's less of
a problem now that I have both my NIC and my RAID card working under
2.2. I stumbled on this kind of by accident. I re-installed RH, and
when it prompted me for a driver disk, I put in the disk for the RAID
card, and noticed that there were other driver options available to me
in addition to the RAID card. One of these was network drivers. I
scrolled around and found the DEC Tulip driver, and installed it. Now
when I boot into 2.2, both the RAID and network cards are supported.
I don't know why inserting a driver disk for a RAID card would bring
up that menu of other drivers, since I know that there's nothing on
the driver floppy except the RAID drivers from Promise, but either
way, it worked. Now I don't have any pressing need to upgrade to 2.4
until I want to get my USB printer and camera working. Until then, I
have an old parallel color deskjet and a parallel Laserjet that both
work just fine under 2.2
Scott
------------------------------
From: Aaron Kulkis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,alt.linux.sux,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 17:09:41 -0500
Bob Hauck wrote:
>
> On 26 Feb 2001 20:40:02 -0600, Jan Johanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >SWC is available and has been for a year. SWC 3 is a release candidate and
> >will be available in just a month.
>
> Didn't you say that a month ago?
Must.....not......ask..........embarrassing...questions.......
>
> --
> -| Bob Hauck
> -| Codem Systems, Inc.
> -| http://www.codem.com/
--
Aaron R. Kulkis
Unix Systems Engineer
DNRC Minister of all I survey
ICQ # 3056642
K: Truth in advertising:
Left Wing Extremists Charles Schumer and Donna Shelala,
Black Seperatist Anti-Semite Louis Farrakan,
Special Interest Sierra Club,
Anarchist Members of the ACLU
Left Wing Corporate Extremist Ted Turner
The Drunken Woman Killer Ted Kennedy
Grass Roots Pro-Gun movement,
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....
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
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"
G: Knackos...you're a retard.
F: Unit_4's "Kook hunt" reminds me of "Jimmy Baker's" harangues against
adultery while concurrently committing adultery with Tammy Hahn.
E: Jet is not worthy of the time to compose a response until
her behavior improves.
D: Jet Silverman now follows me from newgroup to newsgroup
...despite (C) above.
C: Jet Silverman claims to have killfiled me.
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.
A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
