Linux-Advocacy Digest #707, Volume #32 Thu, 8 Mar 01 17:13:03 EST
Contents:
Re: C# (.)
Re: C# (.)
Re: Linux Joke (.)
Re: Why Open Source better be careful - The Microsoft Un-American ("Interconnect")
Re: What does IQ measure? (.)
Re: NT vs *nix performance (.)
Re: Mircosoft Tax (Peter Hayes)
Re: What does IQ measure? (Brock Hannibal)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Steve Mading)
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Steve Mading)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Steve Mading)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Peter Hayes)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"! (Craig Kelley)
Re: Harddisk for Linux (David Dorward)
Re: C# (Craig Kelley)
Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time (Peter Seebach)
Re: What does IQ measure? ("Interconnect")
Re: NT vs *nix performance (Scott Gardner)
Re: Mircosoft Tax ("Ayende Rahien")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: C#
Date: 8 Mar 2001 20:50:33 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> I've looked into ms's C#... looks like the spitting image of java to me!
>> Looks like trouble on the horizon. I wonder if Sun will sue them again??
> Actually, it's not. There are a lot of differneces. The first being that
> it's not interpreted.
Thats actually not a very big difference, developmentally, pinhead.
> Second, even if it were an exact clone of Java, it's already been ruled in
> court that doing so is legal, and there's noting Sun can do about it other
> than enforcing their Java trademark.
Indeed. It is now legal for microsoft to steal from sun.
I liked it better when they stole from apple. Thats start button rules.
=====.
--
"It's natural to expect there might be people doing stupid things
with computers"
---Michael Vatis, director of the FBI's national infrastructure
protection center commenting on Y2K concerns about hacker attacks
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (.)
Subject: Re: C#
Date: 8 Mar 2001 20:52:03 GMT
Erik Funkenbusch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:9882p3$42f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> >> I've looked into ms's C#... looks like the spitting image of java to
>> >> me! Looks like trouble on the horizon. I wonder if Sun will sue them
>> >> again??
>> >
>> > Actually, it's not. There are a lot of differneces. The first being
>> > that it's not interpreted.
>>
>> That has nothing to do with the language, its an implementation detail.
>> JAVA could be interpreted, compiled in to byte code, fully compiles or
>> just-in-time compiled.
> The Java bytecode was designed for the limitations of interpretation. Why
Indeed. One must wonder why the same limitations are in C#, when it is
not interpreted.
Oh yeah, its because microsoft pays their programmers 40K per year and
requires 55 hour workweeks.
Thats a great way to avoid sabotage. Seriously.
=====.
--
"It's natural to expect there might be people doing stupid things
with computers"
---Michael Vatis, director of the FBI's national infrastructure
protection center commenting on Y2K concerns about hacker attacks
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux Joke
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 10:07:40 +1300
> Well you've spent most of the thred claiming that it's insecure. So if
> there are no root exploits, what are the real-world problems faced by
> someone running ssh ? (I'd argue that there aren't any, not any caused
> by ssh anyway)
The only vulnerability I've heard of with ssh is a man in the middle
attack, and that will only work if you accept a new key when you connect
to your server.
If you copy your keys in a safe manner, and don't accept any via the net,
you wont even run the risk of an attack on your ssh connection.
------------------------------
From: "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Why Open Source better be careful - The Microsoft Un-American
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 08:20:47 +1100
> >
> > The fuel of the future will be Fusion power.
>
> Are you talking within the next decade?
>
> If so, please go back to jacking off to your copy of Popular Mechanics,
> Omni, or whatever juvenile trash you read.
>
The future i.e. 10, 20, 50, 100 years etc..
> A: The wise man is mocked by fools.
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 10:18:10 +1300
[EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > It may be an advantage in many situations but if I can get further in a
> > problem than someone who thinks more quickly, who is the most intelligent?
> >
>
> The person who solves the problem first.
I'd claim the person who solved it best.
------------------------------
From: . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 10:21:50 +1300
> > If I'd had a book when I tried slackware, I think I would have liked it
> > more. For some reason, linux basics isn't really that big a candidate
> > for free web pages and stuff. There's no nice 'how to use the shell'
> > type tutorial for linux (man bash REALLY doesn't cut it if you haven't
> > got the concepts down beforehand).
>
> Have you looked at _Learning the Bash Shell_ from O'Reilly?
I don't need to learn it anymore. The problem is, at the time I wanted
to learn, I couldn't afford to buy a book on it, and I couldn't find a
decent free source of information. I had to piece together what I could
understand from the man pages and browsing through the preinstalled
scripts... not something I really recommend for a beginner =\
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 21:27:57 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001 00:01:10 -0600, "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> "." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
<...>
> > > > media player.
> > >
> > > A wav and MIDI player/recorder. Hardly the full featured audio/video
> applet
> > > that WMP is.
> >
> > Yet still more evolution. They haven't really CHANGED anything, just
> > updated it.
>
> Have you even *LOOKED* at WMP? Hell, the damn thing creates CD's in version
> 8.
And just what has WMP got to do with an OS? Since when has an *operating
system* needed a media player/generator?
<...>
> > > > So what accounts for the increase in size by a factor of 15 or more?
> > >
> > > The architectural changes alone take up a lot. There's an entirely new
> API
> > > with thousands of functions.
> >
> > Do you have any details? The newer bastardized Win32 they created for
> > Win95 used to occupy 20Mb suchandsuch 16 bit DLLs, and now consists of
> > 85Mb in blabla 32bit DLLs?
>
> DirectDraw, DirectSound, Direct3D, DirectPlay, DirectAnimation, DirectShow,
> TAPI, MAPI, SAPI, WININET, WinG, Winsock 2 (in addition to Winsock 1 and
> 1.1), fonts, bitmaps, sounds, cursors, icons,
Since when was Direct* part of an operating system?
> Strange, my /usr/X11R6/bin is 40 megs alone. Just for the binaries and
> scripts used for the GUI.
Since when was the contents of /usr/X11R6/bin part of an operating system?
Peter
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 13:39:51 -0800
From: Brock Hannibal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, . wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
> > > It may be an advantage in many situations but if I can get further in a
> > > problem than someone who thinks more quickly, who is the most intelligent?
> > >
> >
> > The person who solves the problem first.
>
> I'd claim the person who solved it best.
Here's a problem.
25.312 X 19.598 = ?
Person A gets the correct answer in 2.3 seconds.
Person B gets the correct answer in 23 seconds.
Who's solution is the best?
However person, A costs me 11 times more per hour than person B.
Now who's solution is best?
Oh, but I needed the answer in under 5 seconds or I died.
Now what?
Define best.
--
Brock
"One thing counts in this life: Get them to sign
on the line which is dotted...A. Always. B. Be.
C. Closing. Always Be Closing."
http://www.swingout.net/
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: 8 Mar 2001 21:38:08 GMT
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: In article <9882ri$4a7$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
:> Save yourself. He has no understanding of the system and absoloutely will
:> not learn.
: I could say the same about you. You're not _listening_ to what I've been
: saying.
Can you tell the difference between _listening_ to what someone
is saying and _agreeing with_ what someone is saying?
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
Date: 8 Mar 2001 21:32:54 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: On 7 Mar 2001 23:56:51 GMT, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>Here's a free clue: Freedom is optimized when *some* reasonable
:>limits exist.
: I think that, in a careful analysis of those limits, they all boil down to
: one principle: "Do not harm another without his consent." The GPV goes well
: beyond the requirements that principle places.
:>The key debatable point here is whether or not the GPL's rules are of
:>the type that lead to greater freedom. I don't think they are,
:>but I also dislike this line of argument that claims the only
:>way for a license to be free is for it to have absolutely no rules
:>attached at all.
: The only rules that need to be attached are those that prevent people from
: taking code released freely and making it no longer available at all to
: anyone under the terms it was originally released. Fortunately, it is not
: necessary to write such rules into the license; they are inherent in the
: body of law that licenses are a part of. BSD-licensed code can NEVER be made
: non-free, even though the BSDL contains no explicit provisions to guarantee
: that.
BSD socket code was put into Windows, a non-free (in both senses of
the word) product. Originally it had been giving credit to BSD
in some verbiage, but it dropped that now that the newer BSD liceses
no longer require mentioning where you got your code from. This is
an example of making some BSD licensed code non-free. It's true
to say that the GPL goes too far by requiring all derivative code to
be released, but the BSD doesn't go far enough, because it doesn't
even require that its own code be released, even if unmodified.
(I can see RMS's point with the library thing, though, since without
that clause there's nothing to stop someone from simply wrapping
a GPL library with do-nothing wrappers, and then releasing that under
a non-free license and lying to people claiming it's your own work.
Where is the distinction drawn between using a library to make something
new on top of it, and using a library to plagerize the library.)
: Thus, the GPV is restrictive beyond that necessary to guarantee
: freedom, and thus it is not free.
------------------------------
From: Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: 8 Mar 2001 21:35:27 GMT
Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Kword, part of Koffice 2.0.1, works as I and any other sane person would
: expect, but it hasn't much idea about fonts. Oh, and Kword crashes into
: oblivion if you ask it to print but there's no printer, or it's not
: switched on.
If that's true, then Kword is NOT using the system's print queue.
If you "lpr" something and the printer doesn't work, that's lpr's
problem do deal with, not the user app.
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: 08 Mar 2001 14:43:13 -0700
Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 08 Mar 2001 11:37:23 -0700, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Your oopsies. You need to setup your default printer.
>
> I did that using CUPS and some apps print fine, like Kword, AbiWord.
Strange. I haven't used CUPS, but plain-old BSD lpr ala RedHat 6.x
and lprng ala RedHat 7.x/Debian works just great.
> > Most
> > distributions will do that for you such that when you send PostScript
> > to the printer it will be rendered and formatted for your particular
> > printer. If you're printer isn't supported then there's nothing you
> > can really do. If you're curious as to the how, please let us know
> > what distribution you're using.
> >
> > By the way: Which distribution ships CUPS as the standard spooler?
>
> Mandrake 7.2 Avoid it like the plague.
So I've been told.
> > > I'm sure a little more research will uncover swathes of apps that have
> > > their own ideas about printing.
> >
> > Not really. UNIX applications expect to print PostScript. Some (like
> > WordPerfect, for example) try to impelement their own rasterizers
> > instead for some reason.
>
> So how is it that some output PostScript and print fine, Kword,
> AbiWord, yet others output PostScript and merely form-feed, LyX???
I have no idea, it's probably a bug in CUPS.
> > > Kword, part of Koffice 2.0.1, works as I and any other sane person
> > > would expect, but it hasn't much idea about fonts. Oh, and Kword
> > > crashes into oblivion if you ask it to print but there's no printer,
> > > or it's not switched on.
> >
> > Considering it is an alpha product, no surprises there...
>
> I thought KOffice was out of beta. If not, then fair comment...
Not yet (at least they haven't announced it if they are).
> > > AbiWord works ok. So do the little text editors like gedit, nedit
> > > texteditor.
> > >
> > > So it's not quite true to say that "the vast majority" don't have
> > > their own drivers. It's a lottery whether your app will print using
> > > the so-called "installed" or "default" printer.
> > >
> > > In the Windows world, these apps wouldn't last five minutes if the
> > > user didn't get an intellegent output from File -> Print.
> >
> > In the Windows world the printer manufacturers write the drivers for
> > Microsoft, whereas we have to do it by hand. It's one of those silly
> > monopoly issues that we keep talking about.
>
> But if the standard Linux way of printing is to generate PostScript and
> modify the PostScript to suit the printer, why does it work sometimes and
> not others?
>
> Such that all the user should need to do is File -> Print.
All mine do. I have 2 PCL printers and many PostScript printers and
they all work just great.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a PCI slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Peter Hayes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 21:44:37 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 08 Mar 2001 20:32:04 GMT, Pete Goodwin
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > But if the standard Linux way of printing is to generate PostScript and
> > modify the PostScript to suit the printer, why does it work sometimes and
> > not others?
> >
> > Such that all the user should need to do is File -> Print.
>
> Which is precisely what I've been "whining" (so-called) about all along.
> What escapes me is why they can't see it.
Perhaps in RedHat or other distros things work as they should and it's only
Mdk that's broken.
Sadly, ISTM that there's something very weird going on in Mdk7.2 or maybe
CUPS.
All I wanted to do was to get LyX to print...
Time to move on. Does Susie 7.1 come with KDE2, XFree402 and kernel 4.x ?
Peter
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: 08 Mar 2001 14:46:12 -0700
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > In the Windows world the printer manufacturers write the drivers for
> > Microsoft, whereas we have to do it by hand. It's one of those silly
> > monopoly issues that we keep talking about.
>
> In the Windows world there appears to be a unified printing model.
> Constrast this with the chaos that appears in the Linux world.
I'm not going to defend the UNIX method in this case, but it certainly
isn't chaos. I have some gripes with UNIX printing myself, but those
gripes are being addressed already even if they aren't commonplace
yet.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a PCI slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Linux "Oopsie"!
Date: 08 Mar 2001 14:46:53 -0700
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > And has been noted *dozens* of times, some Windows applications do the
> > exact same thing.
>
> And as I have already pointed out, none of the one's I use do anything of
> the sort.
Then the simple solution is for you to not use the gimp under Linux.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a PCI slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: David Dorward <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.os.linux.mandrake,alt.os.linux.slackware,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.windows.x.kde,tw.bbs.comp.linux
Subject: Re: Harddisk for Linux
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 21:48:58 +0000
Jerry Wong wrote:
> I want to buy a 30G Harddisk to install Linux (Red Hat 7.0). I heard that
> Lilo has problem for the harddisk over 1024 cylinder. Has this problem be
> overcome?
lilo USED to have a problem if the kernel itself was past c 1024, this has
now been solved and with older distros can be resolved by creating a /boot
partition of about 10 megs at the start of the drive.
I have Linux running very happily indeed on a 30 gig drive.
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: C#
Date: 08 Mar 2001 14:49:22 -0700
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Craig Kelley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > "Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > "GreyCloud" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > >
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > > I've looked into ms's C#... looks like the spitting image of java to
> me!
> > > > Looks like trouble on the horizon. I wonder if Sun will sue them
> again??
> > >
> > > Actually, it's not. There are a lot of differneces. The first
> > > being that it's not interpreted.
> >
> > Java isn't interpreted.
>
> Java is interpreted, it can be compiled, but the language is designed and
> implemented as an interpreted language.
No, it isn't interpreted. I can say I've never used a Java
interpretor, and I've done a lot of Java development.
Just because something doesn't compile into ia32 doesn't mean it's
interpreted.
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a PCI slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,misc.int-property
Subject: Re: definition of "free" for N-millionth time
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Peter Seebach)
Date: 08 Mar 2001 21:56:17 GMT
In article <988tq6$i1e$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In comp.os.linux.advocacy Jay Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: On 7 Mar 2001 23:56:51 GMT, Steve Mading <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>: The only rules that need to be attached are those that prevent people from
>: taking code released freely and making it no longer available at all to
>: anyone under the terms it was originally released. Fortunately, it is not
>: necessary to write such rules into the license; they are inherent in the
>: body of law that licenses are a part of. BSD-licensed code can NEVER be made
>: non-free, even though the BSDL contains no explicit provisions to guarantee
>: that.
>BSD socket code was put into Windows, a non-free (in both senses of
>the word) product.
Are you saying that BSD socket code thereby became non-free? Can you point
me at the historic moment when FreeBSD and NetBSD were required to stop giving
away copies of BSD socket code?
>Originally it had been giving credit to BSD
>in some verbiage, but it dropped that now that the newer BSD liceses
>no longer require mentioning where you got your code from. This is
>an example of making some BSD licensed code non-free.
No, it isn't. It's an example of making some non-free code which is almost
entirely derived from free code. The original code is just as free as it
ever was.
>It's true
>to say that the GPL goes too far by requiring all derivative code to
>be released, but the BSD doesn't go far enough, because it doesn't
>even require that its own code be released, even if unmodified.
Except that, if something has been "released under the BSD license", it
*IS* released. I don't see what the problem is. I can get socket code,
free, and I can use it however I want. My ability to do this is unaffected
by whether or not Microsoft *also* has this freedom.
-s
--
Copyright 2001, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
C/Unix wizard, Pro-commerce radical, Spam fighter. Boycott Spamazon!
Consulting & Computers: http://www.plethora.net/
------------------------------
From: "Interconnect" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: What does IQ measure?
Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2001 09:01:41 +1100
> No I believe what Kulkis said. Why else would it take him so LONG to
> figure out that his .sig is unwanted, and that everyone has him on
> killfile as a result. It's his minuscule IQ.
>
> Now I just have to wait for Kulkis to respond with a lie on how large
> his IQ is (note to Aaron: it only tests effectively up to 130 or so, so
> don't make it a impossible #, like 25 billion).
Well I believe Aron does have a high IQ and IMO ego.
However I would like to make a point that IQ is only one small measure of an
individuals worth. If IQ was the sole determinate of individual
effectiveness for ALL tasks and situations then we would choose our
partners, hair dressers, mechanics, politicians etc.. based exclusively on
IQ. There would be no job interview, you would just sit an IQ test and that
would be the end of the selection process. We would only read books by
Authors with the highest IQ. We would only consume entertainment produced
by Artists with the highest IQ etc..
Also individual brillance is insignificant compared to collective effort.
Consider the SETI project. (NB: not the merit of it's objectives) but HOW
it is going about achieving it's objectives. The collective utilization of
powerful and less powerful computers is contributing to a result that would
not be possible even with the most powerful *individual* super computer.
The KEY to this effort is the ability to communicate, and a common desire /
goal by participants contributing to the project.
The corallaroy being that individual brillance is at best mediocore, if that
person can't interact with their peers to leverage their combined knowledge
and produce by a factor of exponent significantly more than acting alone.
Aron Kulkis "YOU are the weakest link good-bye"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Scott Gardner)
Subject: Re: NT vs *nix performance
Date: Thu, 08 Mar 2001 22:03:28 GMT
On Wed, 7 Mar 2001 11:40:46 +1300, . <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I actually don't know what you're talking about here... in all my recent
>installations, I've never had to 'fuck with hardware' to get it running.
>When I had an OOOOOLD version of Linux, things were definitely pretty
>bad. I was new to it, and all my hardware was new, including a matrox
>video card. I had so much trouble with it that, yes, I gave up and went
>back to windows. But since those dark days, I've never had a major
>problem I couldn't solve with five minutes checking on the net.
You've been luckier than I have. I installed RH 7.0, and here's the
list of stuff that wouldn't work:
Video Card - Diamond Viper II with the Savage 2000 chipset. Works,
but only as a standard SVGA card, and none of the whiz-bang 3D
capabilities are supported yet.
Modem - Diamond SupraMax 56k v.90 PCI. Turns out it is a winmodem, so
I can't blame linux for this, but I originally built/bought this
computer to run Windows, as will have many people trying to upgrade
Linux, and the Diamond marketdroids did their level best to hide the
fact that it's a software modem on the box. I went down to the
computer store yesterday to do research, and unless I were
specifically trying to buy a hardware modem or wanted an external
unit, most of the modems there were winmodems. It wouldn't surprise
me that there are a lot of people out there trying to install linux on
a computer with a winmodem.
Sound card - I actually had two, one in the machine and an older one
lying around. Neither chipset is supported in linux (ESS Canyon 3D
and whatever the Diamond Monster Sound MX300 uses--it's slipped my
mind right now)
Promise IDE Raid card - supported under RH 7.0 kernel 2.2.16 with the
help of a precompiled binary distributed by Promise, but the driver
has to be installed during the initial install of RH, and can't be
added later when I try to upgrade to kernel 2.4.2. Promise has
confirmed this, and has said that it's because they're still working
on a way to distribute the driver without releasing any proprietary
source code, so for the time being, they're probably going to just be
releasing pre-compiled drivers tailored to individual kernel releases
of linux.
Epson 875DCS Photo Stylus USB Printer - This is the USB-only version
of the 870, with the addition of a PCMCIA reader slot. RH 7.0
supports USB out of the box, but only as far as supporting mice and
keyboards. Currently out of luck with this printer and my USB camera
until I figure out a way to upgrade to 2.4.2 and keep my RAID array.
PIE SCSI Scanner - Color flatbed scanner on a proprietary half-card
SCSI interface. I could probably connect it to an honest SCSI
controller, but it doesn't work as is, and since all of the above
problems force me to boot into Windows at one time or another, in the
meantime I'm just doing my scanning in Windows.
Pinnacle Studio DV10 image/sound capture and playback board. Not
even *close* to being supported. Fortunately, I just bought this to
do one particular project, and that project's done now.
Am I trying to belittle linux? Of course not. I'm enjoying using it
and putting time into solving problems that have cropped up. Several
of my problems have been solved by using older, better-supported
hardware that I have lying around. I love how stable it is, and I
enjoy having the power over the operating system that I have been
missing in any flavor of Windows.
I am, however, trying to point out that I did not assemble
this system with the express intent of finding hardware that wasn't
supported under linux, but I still ended up with a half-dozen parts
that wouldn't work. All of these parts are over a year old, so
they're not "bleeding edge" components. I would be very curious to
see how many modern "off-the-shelf" computer systems, (The kind people
buy from Compaq, Dell, Gateway, etcetera) would have all of their
parts supported by linux, since most hardware companies don't offer
much in the way of linux support yet.. I'm not arguing that a system
couldn't be built from relatively new components that would function
perfectly under linux, but I think some thought and careful choice
would have to go into the component selection. For current Windows
users that knew nothing of linux when they bought their computers,
this would not be the case, so their attempts to install even a recent
distribution of linux will likely be fraught with no small amount of
peril.
Scott Gardner
LT US Navy
------------------------------
From: "Ayende Rahien" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Mircosoft Tax
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2001 23:57:26 +0200
"Peter Hayes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> And just what has WMP got to do with an OS? Since when has an *operating
> system* needed a media player/generator?
> Since when was Direct* part of an operating system?
Both are installed with windows, and are part of the size of the
installation files.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
