Linux-Advocacy Digest #470, Volume #33 Mon, 9 Apr 01 21:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: Another Newbie Here (Salvador Peralta)
Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message (Roy Culley)
Re: Lotus Notes on Linux ("Patrick McAllister")
Re: Inktomi Webmap -- Apache has 60% now. (The Ghost In The Machine)
Re: Baseball (Chris Belway)
Re: Q:Windows NT scripting? (LShaping)
Re: Basement Boy: Aka Aaron Koookis ("mmnnoo")
Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead. (Goldhammer)
Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead. (PhOeNiX)
Re: Basement Boy: Aka Aaron Koookis (pip)
Re: Q:Windows NT scripting? (Craig Kelley)
Re: Q:Windows NT scripting? (Craig Kelley)
Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead. (Goldhammer)
Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead. (Craig Kelley)
Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead. (Goldhammer)
Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead. (pip)
Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000? (Goldhammer)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Salvador Peralta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Another Newbie Here
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 16:47:59 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wolfhound quoth:
> Hello,people. I just installed Redhat 7.0 on my machine as dual
> boot. I got everything up just fine but I need alot of basics. ( See
> Linux. See Linux run. Run run Linux.) That type thing.
Umm.. Okay. first, as an FYI, some people get snitty when new users
ask questions like "tell me how to use linux" since often, people ask
without taking the time to look for themselves first, plus the fact
that there is already a ton of information out there to teach newbies
where to start.
But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and put a few things down
that you can find on your own system. At the end, I'll throw in some
good url's to try.
First off, there is probably a ton of html documentation already
installed on your system. The following look like promising
directories on my system. :)
/usr/share/doc/HTML/ -- location of a bunch of html documents
/usr/share/doc/FAQ-Linux -- location of the Linux FAQ's
/usr/share/doc/HOWTO/ -- location of the linux howto's
/usr/share/doc/LDP/ -- location of the Linux documentation project
books. I've got the Linux Programmer's Guide, Linux network Admin's
Guide, Linux Sys Admin's guide, and Linux Administration Made Easy on
my machine. You may have them also.
Your system may be different, so lets try and find a document from
the cli. Open up a terminal session and try this:
[user@localhost user]$ locate LDP | grep nag | less
This command looks for the files with the name LDP in their path,
pipes the result to grep, which looks for files out of the first
group with nag in their path, then pipes the output to the utility
less, which gives your output one screen at a time.
for info on the utilities I just used try:
man less
man grep
man locate
man bash
Instead of using less to view the list of documents screen by screen,
you can redirect your output to a text file like so:
[user@localhost user]$ locate LDP | grep LAME > admin.txt
if you have any files in LDP with the pattern LAME in them, they will
be outputted to a text document which you can open in vi, a
commandline text editor:
[user@localhost user]$ vi admin.txt
to learn how to use vi, just type vi at the commandline for a
tutorial.
You could also use a utility like tail to view some of the entries:
[user@localhost user]$ tail -25 admin.txt
In this case, I used the utility, tail to view the last 25 entries of
the howto.txt file. To view the first 25, try:
[user@localhost user]$ head -25 admin.txt
man tail
man head
If you don't want to muck about at the cli, just start an xwindows
session ( startx ), launch a browser ( konqueror, netscape, etc. )
and type / in the commandline and navigate to directories that look
promising.
Other places to start:
>From the commandline on your system:
[user@localhost user]$ man man
Yields info on how to use the man pages that came with your system.
Most applications written on linux will have man pages. Be warned,
man pages generally target more advanced users, but you should start
getting in the habit of looking through that stuff.
[user@localhost user]$ info info
Yields info on how to use the info pages that came with your system.
[user@localhost user]$ man bash
yields info on how to use bash, the default linux shell.
[user@localhost user]$ perldoc perldoc
teaches you how to use the perl documentation bundled with your Perl
distribution.
Some good URL's:
Linux docs ( many of which are already on your system )
http://www.ibiblio.org/pub/Linux/docs
here's an okay newbie link:
http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue34/anderson.html
and another:
http://jgo.local.net/LinuxGuide/linux-basics.html
Okay, truth is, I just typed 'linux basics' in google for the last 2
links. You can too.
Have fun!
--
Salvador Peralta -o)
Programmer/Analyst, Webmaster / \
[EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Roy Culley)
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,soc.singles
Subject: Re: lack of linux billionaires explained in one easy message
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 00:08:38 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <np9A6.2101$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> You have no understanding of numbers. More gumbos install Windows on
> servers than any other operating system, because gumbos are prevalent, and
> can install little else. Let's also not forget that these numbers could
> easily be inflated because Windows isn't particularly suited to running more
> than one demanding service.
One of the main reasons for the large increase in NT server use a couple of years
ago was when companies replaced existing servers (unix, vms, etc) by jumping on
the NT bandwagon. Due to stability / performance problems they then had to buy
more NT servers just to provide the level of service they had before. At the
time we had to fight really hard to keep our critical servers on Unix. Today it
is much easier to convince management that NT/W2K is not a solution.
------------------------------
From: "Patrick McAllister" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lotus Notes on Linux
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 19:46:22 -0400
http://Domino.0mm.com/acx251002
You might try this link, coincidentally enough got it today from
groupcomputing...hth (I haven't even checked the link, so I don't have any
idea if this is what you are looking for or not!)
"Paulette Poullain" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi there.
>
> Do you have references or sites where I could find experiences of
> people and advices from them regarding the use of Lotus Notes
> server on Linux machines ?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (The Ghost In The Machine)
Subject: Re: Inktomi Webmap -- Apache has 60% now.
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 00:03:20 GMT
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, GreyCloud
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote
on Mon, 09 Apr 2001 12:52:03 -0700
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>> Good news! Apache now has 60.33% of the total server market,
>> compared to Microsoft-IIS's 25.26% share. Netscape-Enterprise
>> is a distant third at 3.79%.
>>
>> http://www.inktomi.com/webmap/
>>
>> Unfortunately, there is no information regarding secure webservers.
>>
>> --
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
>> EAC code #191 3d:21h:47m actually running Linux.
>> You were expecting something relevant down here?
>
>I think IIS is not very secure. Suns news org said something about
>Compaqs' servers were hacked into again. Doesn't sound secure to me.
It probably isn't, but then, I can't say I know; I'm trying to
figure out whether Microsoft has dominance anywhere in the server
sphere. From the looks of it, it doesn't have dominance in
the non-secure area.
I can also tell you that the Consumer Product Safety Commission site
was hacked (http://www.cpsc.gov); this is running Microsoft-IIS/4.0.
http://www.cnn.com/2001/TECH/internet/04/09/hack.cpsc/index.html?s=8
is the CNN article; related stories describe other hacks.
http://www.sun.com looks slightly borked right now.
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1006-200-4837854.html?tag=mn_hd
may be what you're describing. This was almost two months ago.
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- insert random misquote here
EAC code #191 3d:11h:33m actually running Linux.
No electrons were harmed during this message.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Belway)
Crossposted-To: soc.singles,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Baseball
Date: 10 Apr 2001 00:10:03 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Chris Belway)
T. Max Devlin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
> Said Chris Belway in alt.destroy.microsoft on 6 Apr 2001 02:29:56 GMT;
>>T. Max Devlin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
>>> Said Mike in alt.destroy.microsoft on Thu, 05 Apr 2001 16:16:12 -0700;
>>>>"." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> why don't you do something to make unix as easy to use as windows while
>>>>>> retaining the former's stability and put microsoft out of business?
>>>>>
>>>>>Windows isn't easy to use, it's pretty damned painful and stressful. To
>>>>>have excel GPF because you typed numbers into a cell, and lose your most
>>>>>recent work, is frustrating and inexplicable. Especially when you can load
>>>>>it up a second time and do exactly the same thing, but this time it wont
>>>>>crash.
>>>>>
>>>>>Every time I use linux, it does what I would expect it to do. THAT'S ease
>>>>>of use.
>>>>
>>>>WHERE ARE THE LINUX BILLIONAIRES?????
>>>
>>> They're all over the place.
>>>
>>> Consider the "market price" of a PC OS. Let's say, fifty bucks. Now,
>>> that's just an EULA. A developer's license (yea, you see where I'm
>>> going with this) with source code and unlimited right to produce
>>> derivative property, that would probably cost no less than a few
>>> thousand bucks. But that's per computer; the right to distribute the OS
>>> or put it on any number (that's ANY NUMBER, one to one million, if you
>>> have, sell, or touch that many PCs) of computers.
>>>
>>> There are several million Linux billionaires, the way I see it.
>>>
>>
>>T. Max Devlin, is Esperanto your native language?
>>
>>Just wondering?
> [...]
>>Where are the Linux Billionaires?
> [...]
>>WELL?
>
> Chris Belway, is English a language you don't understand? Just
> wondering. Or perhaps you're as clueless as most dot-commers about what
> "capital value" means.
>
Esperanto is your native language.
And were are the Linux Billionaries? In never never land.
sorry about that
------------------------------
From: LShaping <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Q:Windows NT scripting?
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 23:55:37 GMT
Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Mon 09 Apr 2001 02:09, Craig Kelley wrote:
>
>> Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
> [Snip]
>>>
>>> The problem, of course, is that efficient and stable are pretty much
>>> mutually exclusive at this point in time. Windows chooses efficiency
>>> (although XFree 4.0 has made great strides in this area), while X chooses
>>> stability of the system.
>>
>> You haven't used DRI then?
>>
>
>I'm using XFree 4.0 with DRI, and don't get me wrong, it's quite speedy,
>although slightly more sluggish than I remember 'doze 98 being (I can't
>verify that, since I have since nuked my 'doze partition). But it also has
>a habit of locking up slightly more frequently than XFree 3.3.6 used to,
>and keeping the module for my Voodoo3 synched with my current kernel used
>to suck until they started bundling it with the kernel.
>
>I still believe that modern video hardware is complex and buggy enough that
>it is impossible to write a Ring-0 driver that is simultaneously both
>stable and efficient, and it's unfortunate that there's nothing Linux (or
>any OS) could do to fix it. In my experience, more often than any other
>component in a computer, video card hardware is the culprit in any sort of
>mysterious failure.
My system, Windows Millennium, does some complex video stuff
reasonably well IMO. I can switch back and forth between my C++
programming, a cumbersome DirectX game, various formats of graphics
files, the Internet (using a firewall), and doing so with several
system hooks running simultaneously (one is mine :o).
Out,
LShaping
------------------------------
From: "mmnnoo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Basement Boy: Aka Aaron Koookis
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 00:31:38 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "WesTralia"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well Aaron, the obvious has become VERY obvious. You my friend, are a
> Windows 98 only user. There is no camouflage, there is no security
> through obfuscation, there is no header string being changed, and there
> is certainly no truth to your shoddy claim.
>
>
> You see Aaron, if YOU could change the X-Mailer: as we have requested,
> you would have changed the string. Your ego is too big not to do so.
> If YOU could change that string you would have changed it a million
> times by now. Your ego is too big not to do so.
>
> It must be pretty embarrassing for you to have all the REAL Unix users
> in this group freely changing their X-Mailer strings at will, yet poor
> little Aaron cannot.
>
> The fat lady is singing, LOUDLY!
>
> (Aaron Kulkis - convicted full-time Windows 98 user)
This ranting of yours isn't exactly dignified, either
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goldhammer)
Subject: Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 00:39:22 GMT
On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 12:11:14 +0100,
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>While you and I _can_ get the old CD-Writer working under Linux, I would
>not say that the process was "easy". Making IDE-APTI cd-writer into a
>pseudo scsi device
IDE/ATAPI *has become* a pseudo-SCSI interface. IIRC, CR-Rs are
SCSI devices. ATAPI provides a subset of SCSI, historically
(see extract below) for using SCSI devices on typical Wintel
platforms. But why bother with IDE-ATAPI? Remove ide-atapi cdrom
support, enable generic scsi support in the kernel, and enable
ide-scsi in the kernel. Then use your CD-Rs, CD-RWs,CD-ROMs,
as SCSI devices /dev/sr0, /dev/sr1, etc.
A summary of the process:
http://lists.kando.hu/pipermail/gnometoaster/1999-December/000050.html
>using new kernel modules would certainly put off many
>people who are not really into computers.
It's confusing because IDE/ATAPI is confusing. If the
desktop world all used SCSI as the gods decreed they should,
nobody would be confused. But man has fashioned for himself
graven images like IDE, and strayed from the path of
righteousness.
Anyhow, once you read some docs, the setup is pretty simple
and quite logical.
http://gnometoaster.rulez.org/documentation/gnometoaster_users_guide.html
"Because of the history of CD Writers, all recorders on
the market today are using a SCSI command set to communicate
with the operating system and the recording software. This is
how it came: CD Writers, because of their nature as write-once
devices, need a continuous data stream when burning a CDR medium.
If the transfer rate drops below a certain level only once in a
recoding session, the blank you've been recording is usually lost.
With initial medium prices at about $30, it made no sense to even
risk this to happen. The SCSI transport standard, in contrast to
IDE/ATAPI, has long been known to yield both high transfer rates
at low CPU time consumption and high reliability because SCSI
devices are independent to other SCSI devices on their bus. So
SCSI was chosen to be the bus system for the first CD Writers
on the market. However, when the first ATAPI cd recorders hit
the low-cost market, nobody wanted to change the way the drives
were being accessed at software level because this would have
required manufacturers to design a new drive chipset from scratch,
let alone the effort to reimplement all the driver infrastructure
present already at the software side. So they just designed an
additional protocol layer wrapping the scsi commands into ATAPI
commands for the transfer over the IDE bus. So all a recording
software wanting to support ATAPI writers has to do is wrapping
the inital SCSI commands into the ATAPI protocol and sending them
to the cd writer over the IDE bus. This process is usually performed
by a special DLL coming the the recording Software in Windows(tm)
environments because there's no support by the operating system.
Linux, however, comes with a complete SCSI over ATAPI emulator
kernel driver. All you have to do to make your IDE recorder work
with any linux cd recording software out there is to configure your
linux kernel to make use of the idescsi device driver. How to do
this is highly depending on your system configuration and esp. the
distribution you're using. Linux Mandrake for example is configuring
the idescsi driver automatically if it detects a cd writer during
installation. If you're using a self-compiled kernel,however,you'll
have to either compile idescsi support directly into the kernel, in
which case all your ATAPI cdrom drives will appear to be SCSI drives
from now on or compile idescsi as a module in which case you'll have
to tell the linux kernel with a parameter handed down to the kernel
by LILO at startup which drives you want to use idescsi with.
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
------------------------------
From: PhOeNiX <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead.
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 00:29:41 GMT
On 09 Apr 2001 13:31:07 -0600, Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>kirk@do_not_spam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> [snip]
>
>> I can't believe this. why, I ask why, can't linux be as simple as windows?
>>
>> anyone who think this stuff will challenge windows must be on drugs, and
>> I really mean that.
>
>I didn't realize that you could burn CDs with Windows right out of the
>box! We were always installing (paid for) 3rd-party software like
>Adaptec Easy-CD to do it for us.
>
>Please include details on how Windows is easier out-of-the-box.
Hehe.
for lilo...(/etc/lilo.conf)
append="hd?=ide-scsi"
for grub...(/boot/grub/menu.lst)
hd?=ide-scsi
ln -s /dev/scd0 /dev/cdrom //assuming no other scsi cdroms
modprobe ide-scsi
mount /cdrom
I suppose in an out-of-the-box war Free would win on this one since
burncd can talk directly to the ata driver (no aspi/scsi necessary).
phoenix
_______________________________________________________
In the year 2001, a movie staring Steven Seagal was the
number one movie in America. The final sign of the
apocolypse has come...
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Basement Boy: Aka Aaron Koookis
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 01:47:09 +0100
WesTralia wrote:
>
> Well Aaron, the obvious has become VERY obvious. You my friend, are a
> Windows 98 only user. There is no camouflage, there is no security through
> obfuscation, there is no header string being changed, and there is certainly
> no truth to your shoddy claim.
I can't see why it can't be true. After all, my headers may appear that
I am posting from a Win98 box when actually I an using my CRAY
supa-scalar supercomputing platform (model b). I change my headers 'cos
I would not want you Linux types logging in and stealing my cpu cycles
(I don't trust firewalls).
[actually posted from a WinME Laptop connecting to a Win98 box via
pcAnywhere and then using a Linux box to finally shove this text down my
dsl. What a complex world we live in.] :-)
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Q:Windows NT scripting?
Date: 09 Apr 2001 18:51:00 -0600
Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon 09 Apr 2001 02:09, Craig Kelley wrote:
>
> > Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> [Snip]
> >>
> >> The problem, of course, is that efficient and stable are pretty much
> >> mutually exclusive at this point in time. Windows chooses efficiency
> >> (although XFree 4.0 has made great strides in this area), while X chooses
> >> stability of the system.
> >
> > You haven't used DRI then?
> >
>
> I'm using XFree 4.0 with DRI, and don't get me wrong, it's quite speedy,
> although slightly more sluggish than I remember 'doze 98 being (I can't
> verify that, since I have since nuked my 'doze partition). But it also has
> a habit of locking up slightly more frequently than XFree 3.3.6 used to,
> and keeping the module for my Voodoo3 synched with my current kernel used
> to suck until they started bundling it with the kernel.
>
> I still believe that modern video hardware is complex and buggy enough that
> it is impossible to write a Ring-0 driver that is simultaneously both
> stable and efficient, and it's unfortunate that there's nothing Linux (or
> any OS) could do to fix it. In my experience, more often than any other
> component in a computer, video card hardware is the culprit in any sort of
> mysterious failure.
Video cards are the most complicated piece of equipment in your
machine, much more so than any single other piece -- and this just
seems to be getting worse with time.
I don't believe the cards need to run at ring 0, but it's been a while
since I studied up on ia32 architecture (can AGP do a DMA transfer
using a lesser privilege? can AGP access primary memory with a lesser
privilege?)
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a 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]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: Q:Windows NT scripting?
Date: 09 Apr 2001 18:53:13 -0600
Chronos Tachyon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Mon 09 Apr 2001 02:13, Craig Kelley wrote:
>
> > 667 Neighbor of the Beast <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> [Snip]
> >>
> >> No it is not L. The GDI are the video drivers and there is really no
> >> sense at all in putting them in the kernel, except to make the system
> >> appear faster. OS/2 and Unix do not have the GDI in the kernel.
> >> Also, you are confusing the GDI with the GUI, and they are 2 separate
> >> things.
> >
> > Hmmm:
> >
> > *
> > * Hardware configuration
> > *
> > Floppy tape controllers (Standard, MACH-2, FC-10/FC-20, Alt/82078)
> > [Standard]
> > defined CONFIG_FT_STD_FDC
> > Default FIFO threshold (EXPERIMENTAL) (CONFIG_FT_FDC_THR) [8]
> > Maximal data rate to use (EXPERIMENTAL) (CONFIG_FT_FDC_MAX_RATE) [2000]
> > /dev/agpgart (AGP Support) (CONFIG_AGP) [M/n/y/?]
> > Intel 440LX/BX/GX and I815/I840/I850 support (CONFIG_AGP_INTEL) [Y/n/?]
> > Intel I810/I815 (on-board) support (CONFIG_AGP_I810) [Y/n/?]
> > VIA chipset support (CONFIG_AGP_VIA) [Y/n/?]
> > AMD Irongate support (CONFIG_AGP_AMD) [Y/n/?]
> > Generic SiS support (CONFIG_AGP_SIS) [Y/n/?]
> > ALI chipset support (CONFIG_AGP_ALI) [Y/n/?]
> > Direct Rendering Manager (XFree86 DRI support) (CONFIG_DRM) [Y/n/?]
> > 3dfx Banshee/Voodoo3+ (CONFIG_DRM_TDFX) [M/n/y/?]
> > 3dlabs GMX 2000 (CONFIG_DRM_GAMMA) [M/n/y/?]
> > ATI Rage 128 (CONFIG_DRM_R128) [M/n/?]
> > ATI Radeon (CONFIG_DRM_RADEON) [M/n/?]
> > Intel I810 (CONFIG_DRM_I810) [M/n/?]
> > Matrox g200/g400 (CONFIG_DRM_MGA) [M/n/?]
> >
> > # uname --release
> > 2.4.2
> >
>
> DRI is basically a kernel shim for accelerated 3D video support, and not a
> full-blown videocard driver. It doesn't even touch the realm of 2D video
> support. Even so, DRI comes at the cost of some system stability.
Shall I bring up the Linux framebuffer then?
The Linux kernel is up to it's elbows in graphics code, and it has
been for quite some time now.
The difference between Linux and Windows is that your can turn it off
under Linux (for a server, for instance) -- Windows has no way to boot
into a non-gui runmode [hint: Microsoft, this would be a good thing
to implement].
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goldhammer)
Subject: Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 00:53:21 GMT
On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 12:24:56 +0100,
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"kirk@do_not_spam" wrote:
>> anyone who think this stuff will challenge windows must be on drugs, and
>> I really mean that.
>
>If you had properly asked for help or read the documentation, maybe you
>would have had a better experience, yet as we sow what we reap you have
>failed. Insulting something just because you can't get it to work does
>not mean that suddenly Windows is "better" than Linux.
It's probable that Kirk was trolling. In his original
post, he expressed frustration about having to
recompile the kernel to get his CD-Writer working. So
far, so good, it's understandable. A reasonable response
would be to ignore the ranting and just try to answer
his question, or refer him to a help newsgroup. I'm
certain that there are lurkers who have the very same
question on their minds right now.
But in a later post, Kirk changed the story to 'recompiling
the kernel to get CD-ROMs to work' at which point, the
troll light went on.
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
------------------------------
From: Craig Kelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead.
Date: 09 Apr 2001 18:55:14 -0600
pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> While you and I _can_ get the old CD-Writer working under Linux, I
> would not say that the process was "easy".
Hmmm, RedHat wolverine just auto-detected mine and set it up for me.
It even made a desktop icon for it and installed xcdroast as well.
RedHat 7.1 is shaping up to be a _very_ nice distribution. :)
--
It won't be long before the CPU is a card in a slot on your ATX videoboard
Craig Kelley -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.isu.edu/~kellcrai finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP block
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goldhammer)
Subject: Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead.
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 00:56:21 GMT
On Mon, 09 Apr 2001 08:46:24 -0400, mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I am amazed that the distributions do not include the IDE-SCSI module
>in their kernels as the default, that's the first thing I add. I think
>all CDs should be managed through the emulation layer, that way problems
>like your would be a thing of the past.
I absolutely agree with this. Distro managers should listen to mlw.
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: another example of why Linux is brain dead.
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 02:02:36 +0100
Goldhammer wrote:
> It's confusing because IDE/ATAPI is confusing. If the
> desktop world all used SCSI as the gods decreed they should,
> nobody would be confused. But man has fashioned for himself
> graven images like IDE, and strayed from the path of
> righteousness.
I shall endeavour to switch from my IDE madness if thou can provide a
gift of the overpriced controller cards and the overpriced devices to
which it connects. The SCSI vendors pockets groan with the gold that
hath been confiscated from thy performance freaks. May they have
multiple transactions on their bus and feel better for it. May they have
multiple channels for their data. May I not be jealous of my neighbours
bandwidth or burst speeds for I am a proud IDE user.
:-)
>
> Anyhow, once you read some docs, the setup is pretty simple
> and quite logical.
>
> http://gnometoaster.rulez.org/documentation/gnometoaster_users_guide.html
Thanks, I'll peruse these links and find out more.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Goldhammer)
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.advocacy,alt.solaris.x86,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: Is StarOffice 5.2 "compatible" w/MS Office 97/2000?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 10 Apr 2001 01:05:11 GMT
On 9 Apr 2001 12:10:17 -0500, Logan Shaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In that sense, MS Word is sort of like portobello mushrooms. I've been
>to several restaurants which use portobello mushrooms (and/or other
>trendy ingredients like arugula) like a silver bullet. They don't
>actually know how to prepare food that's tasty, but they figure all
>they need to to is to include some trendy ingredients and write a good
>description on the menu, and it will make their food good. And some
>people are impressed.
Portobellos used to be a cheap, common mushroom that nobody
was buying. Marketers changed the name to "portobello", jacked
up the price, and now suddenly they're occupying an honoured
place in fine cuisine.
--
Don't think you are. Know you are.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
