Linux-Advocacy Digest #50, Volume #34 Mon, 30 Apr 01 08:13:05 EDT
Contents:
Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product ("Edward Rosten")
Re: 8086's ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop (Ian Davey)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (pip)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (pip)
Re: there's always a bigger fool (Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?=)
Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts ("Edward Rosten")
Linux for Playstation2 ("jaumann1")
Re: there's always a bigger fool ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Does Linux support "Burn-Proof" CDRW's ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product (Chris Ahlstrom)
Re: Does Linux support "Burn-Proof" CDRW's (pip)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: *Great* Penguin photos for your linux wallpaper (in alt.binaries.wallpaper)
("jim")
Re: Windows is a virus ("jim")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product (Ian Davey)
Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ? (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts (Matthew Gardiner)
Re: Windows is a virus ("Edward Rosten")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 12:23:56 +0100
>> This could go on forever.....
>
> No, it can't. Both things are more easily done via a GUI. Note, not more
> easily *programed* via GUI (I hate doing GUI work), but they are easier
> to use that way.
I don't agree, but here's another example.
Find all text files on the system.
I'm not talking about all files ending in .txt, but all text files.
find -print0 | xargs -n1 -0 file | grep text
How the hell would you do that in a GUI?
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: 8086's
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 12:27:40 +0100
> Hey wait just one minute now. Up until April 1996 I was still using my
> 8086! Damn I loved that box! I was doing real work on it and getting
> paid real live money too....word processing, mostly. It never crashed
> once. It was so cool....no hard drive (LOL) a whopping 512 KB of memory
> (on floppy, mebbe) and a gigantic motherboard for what purpose I know
> not.
> And that eternally uncrashable MS-DOS from 1985. I think it is now
> enhancing an ocean fishing reef somewhere.
That's a shame. I find it noce to keep these old tech things, since thay
can often remind you of alterante ways of doing things that have been
swamped by the must-have-gui-mantra.
Also, they're fun. Some of the games they had were second to none.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: soc.singles
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 10:39:02 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
>On Fri, 27 Apr 2001 16:24:07 GMT, Ian Davey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Aaron R. Kulkis"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Well, let's see.
>>>>
>>>> Gays use sex much the same way hets do; as a method of recreation,
>>>> excercise, sharing, comforting, bonding, play, relaxation, stress relief,
>>>> expression of love, to increase closeness and intimacy, and so on. So one
>>>> would conclude that if homosexuality is detestable, so is all sex.
>>>
>
>No, just all homosexual sex.
So you're quite happy with oral and anal sex amongst consenting hetrosexuals
then?
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:50:17 +0100
GreyCloud wrote:
>
> That is because everything in windows runs in ring 0. In linux you have
> several ring levels that keep apps away from the kernel and daemons away
> from the kernel. This is done for stability. Win9x series may run a
> little faster, but it occasionaly croaks on the user.
...also X uses a convoluted client/server architecture and a complex
protocol. Good for network apps - not so good for your own computer. The
latest Xfree has included a few neat features to address this (DDR). But
the tradeoffs are network portability and increased system stability.
Take your pick.
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:56:44 +0100
Interconnect wrote:
>
> Put simply Linux is excellent. I'm looking forward to getting my DSL
> (broadband) internet access so I can download the newest versions and heaps
> of FREE apps. I'm learning OpenGL with a view to getting into 3D graphics
> programming, playing around with some other free tools such as Blender and
> CrystalSpace. To do this on windows you would need big $$$.
Believe me, it is a *great* feeling to be able to legally download a
fantastic OS and thousands of apps over your own high-speed connection!
I've d/l'ed RH7.1. No waiting for the CD's! I was messing around with
OpenGL quite a few months ago and there are quite a few good OpenGL
tutorial web sites around. I don't know if it is only me that has this
problem - but I seem to find loads of cool stuff - I *think* that I have
bookmarked it and then when I try and find it.... (so, sorry no links).
Good luck!
------------------------------
From: Peter =?ISO-8859-1?Q?K=F6hlmann?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
Subject: Re: there's always a bigger fool
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:54:23 +0200
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> An unbelievably arcane feature.
>
> Once upon a time, the 8086 had 20 address lines (A0-A19) allowing it to
> access up to 1MB of memory.
>
> Then along came the 286 which had 24 address lines.
>
> The 286 which offered amongst other things 8086 compaitbility
> mode, 286 mode, 8086 virtual machine mode and an 8086 enhanced mode.
>
> The 8086 enhcnced mode is rather curious. It allows the 286 running in
> 8086 mode to access the 21st address line A20. However due to a curious
> segmentation feature (the deatails escape me) it does not double the
> address space, but merely adds on an extra segment (64K in size, I
> believe). This feature working on A20 is called the A20 gate.
>
>
Your description is (not quite) right.
The 8086 / 8088 addressed Memory via Segment Regs. Inside this segment
you could address the memory via an offset of max 64K.
Now assume you set the Segment to 0FFFFh. The Offset now wraps after the
first 16 bytes into Address 0000:0000. There actually was software which
depended on such a braindead adressing scheme, notably MS-BASIC.
Now the 286 as it was designed did not emulate the feature, the wrap
around did not occur, instead the first 64K - 16 Bytes inside the 2nd
MByte were adressed. To sail around such an obstacle IBM came with the
A20-Gate, which set A20 to 0 all the time or let it follow the address
line. This A20-gate was notorious slow, because it was switched via the
(quite slow) keyboard processor.
Note that this would not have been needed had not MickeySoft made such
fine software depending on this shit (to my knowledge they were the only
ones).
Peter
--
Microsoft's Product Strategy: "It compiles, let's ship it!"
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: soc.singles
Subject: Re: Why Linux Is no threat to Windows domination of the desktop
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 12:57:24 +0100
>>>> Gays use sex much the same way hets do; as a method of recreation,
>>>> excercise, sharing, comforting, bonding, play, relaxation, stress
>>>> relief, expression of love, to increase closeness and intimacy, and
>>>> so on. So one would conclude that if homosexuality is detestable, so
>>>> is all sex.
>>>
>
> No, just all homosexual sex.
Is there any reason (apart from religious) that you find homosexual sex
detestable?
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 12:58:30 +0100
> I don't know if it is only me that has this
> problem - but I seem to find loads of cool stuff - I *think* that I have
> bookmarked it and then when I try and find it.... (so, sorry no links).
> Good luck!
LOL!
You're not the only one.
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "jaumann1" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Linux for Playstation2
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 10:59:35 GMT
Sony Computer Entertainment of Japan will soon release Linux for the
Playstation 2 (compatible only with early model Jap. PC card versions) as
part of a kit that includes a hard drive, keyboard, mouse, vga adapter, and
PS2 architectural manuals for about $200(US) in response to "consumer
pressures" in the form of an Online Petition. There are surprisingly few
U.S. and European signers, so if having a machine capable of 5 GFLOPS for
about $500 interests you please consider signing at
http://www.fakeroot.net/ps2linux/index.php3.en
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: there's always a bigger fool
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:00:11 +0100
<snip>
Thanks, looked like I got the details a bit wrong.
still, its just as archane :-)
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux support "Burn-Proof" CDRW's
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:23:17 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> When you do a rpm -i xxx.rpm I don't know where things go unless I do
> more digging. Therefore you could say that the two are quite similar
> except that most install-shield installs let you choose the base
> directory and do some install customisations. I don't know if .deb is
> better (I must plead ignorance - but I hear good things about it), but
> IMHO RPM leaves a lot to be desired in some aspects. I like some
> features such as the idea of querying a file to find our what package it
> belongs to and Uninstall DOES actually uninstall it, but it needs
> improving. In either case I find install-shield a far easier and better
> way to install things than say the GnoRPM installer. We _need_ a better
> install system. I don't really care that much from my point of view
> because a prefer doing the old nerd-type src.tar.gz config/make route,
> but for most other people this area REALLY needs improvement. That is
> not to say that RPM is not configurable and powerful - just that it
> should be geared towards people who need to know nothing about RPM other
> than to click on an icon. Actually, scrub that. I'd like a point and
> click customisable install method as well. If fact I would like a method
> that would do a src configure/compile/install automatically in one go -
> just as easily as rpm -i. That would actually be what I'd quite like.
Well,
Actually .deb is not much better than rpm. About the only significant
difference is that .deb supports multiple levels of dependency (ie:
requires, recommends and suggests).
Why you hear so many people (me included) raving about .deb is the tools
supplied to manage them. The basic package manager is dpkg which is
functionally equivalent to rpm, but the tools that build on dpkg are the
real winners. Apt-get install <foo> for example installs foo and all
required dependencies. Apt-get build-dep <foo> makes sure that you have
all the required development packages on your system to build foo, and
apt-get --compile source <foo> fetches foo and compiles it for you
(you'd still have to install the binaries manually though).
The best thing is that apt is not bound to a single package manager. In
fact it has already been ported to rpm, so expect Linux software
installation to become remarkably superior to Windows in the coming year.
Mart
--
Write in C, write in C,
Write in C, yeah, write in C.
Only wimps use BASIC, Write in C.
http://www.orca.bc.ca/spamalbum/
------------------------------
From: Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:26:53 GMT
Edward Rosten wrote:
>
> >> This could go on forever.....
> >
> > No, it can't. Both things are more easily done via a GUI. Note, not more
> > easily *programed* via GUI (I hate doing GUI work), but they are easier
> > to use that way.
>
> I don't agree, but here's another example.
>
> Find all text files on the system.
>
> I'm not talking about all files ending in .txt, but all text files.
>
> find -print0 | xargs -n1 -0 file | grep text
>
> How the hell would you do that in a GUI?
With a GUI "front-end" to "find", nyuk nyuk!!!!
Chris
--
Free the Software!
------------------------------
From: pip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Does Linux support "Burn-Proof" CDRW's
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 12:40:15 +0100
Mart van de Wege wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> "pip" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > When you do a rpm -i xxx.rpm I don't know where things go unless I do
> > more digging. Therefore you could say that the two are quite similar
> > except that most install-shield installs let you choose the base
> > directory and do some install customisations. I don't know if .deb is
> > better (I must plead ignorance - but I hear good things about it), but
> > IMHO RPM leaves a lot to be desired in some aspects. I like some
> > features such as the idea of querying a file to find our what package it
> > belongs to and Uninstall DOES actually uninstall it, but it needs
> > improving. In either case I find install-shield a far easier and better
> > way to install things than say the GnoRPM installer. We _need_ a better
> > install system. I don't really care that much from my point of view
> > because a prefer doing the old nerd-type src.tar.gz config/make route,
> > but for most other people this area REALLY needs improvement. That is
> > not to say that RPM is not configurable and powerful - just that it
> > should be geared towards people who need to know nothing about RPM other
> > than to click on an icon. Actually, scrub that. I'd like a point and
> > click customisable install method as well. If fact I would like a method
> > that would do a src configure/compile/install automatically in one go -
> > just as easily as rpm -i. That would actually be what I'd quite like.
> Well,
>
> Actually .deb is not much better than rpm. About the only significant
> difference is that .deb supports multiple levels of dependency (ie:
> requires, recommends and suggests).
> Why you hear so many people (me included) raving about .deb is the tools
> supplied to manage them. The basic package manager is dpkg which is
> functionally equivalent to rpm, but the tools that build on dpkg are the
> real winners. Apt-get install <foo> for example installs foo and all
> required dependencies. Apt-get build-dep <foo> makes sure that you have
> all the required development packages on your system to build foo, and
> apt-get --compile source <foo> fetches foo and compiles it for you
> (you'd still have to install the binaries manually though).
Interesting. The Apt-get thing sounds interesting. When you say that it
installs the required dependencies, do you mean that it simply prompts
you like rpm, or does it actually allow you to download them there and
then?
> The best thing is that apt is not bound to a single package manager. In
> fact it has already been ported to rpm, so expect Linux software
> installation to become remarkably superior to Windows in the coming year.
I hope so. I was installing a ppp-adsl rpm and it went something like
rpm -i ppp-adsl-fr.rpm
Failed: Package dependency ppp-adsl-fr.1.3.rpm
[got that]
rpm -i ppp-adsl.1.3.rpm [no fr version that i could find]
Failed: Package dependency lib-safe.1.2.rpm
[got that]
rpm -i libsafe1.2.rpm
[then finally]
rpm -i ppp-adsl-fr.1.3.rpm
[then]
rpm -i ppp-adsl-fr.rpm
Failed: Package dependency ppp-adsl-fr.1.3.rpm
rpm -i --force --nodeps ppp-adsl-fr.rpm
and it works. A bit of a hassle to say the least. Now I know why I just
normally grab the tar ball.
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 23:38:12 +1200
Pete Goodwin wrote:
> Donovan Rebbechi wrote:
>
>> Try loading Win 2k on the same system. Comparing Linux with Win98 is not
>> really a fair comparison -- Linux is closer to NT/W2k in functionality.
>
> Windows 2000 will crawl, I suspect.
>
>> If you want to compare with W98, you also need to spend some time
>> trashing W98's reliability, its susceptibility to viruses, and its
>> complete absence of server functionality.
>
> Windows 98 SE is fine as a server (we have one running for months at
> work). Provided you don't do anything else with it. I have file shares and
> a web server running on it. No ftp server though.
>
Thats laughable, I was downloading some mp3s and what-not off a guys
peecee, he had 3 others, and his connection was cable, the number of times
he had to reboot because of lock-ups, BSODs, thus interrupt the download
process was unberrible, I later helped him via ICQ (since he lived in the
US), how to install Linux and configure the FTP server etc, after that, he
was able to complete his CAD assignments for school, and people were able
to download with the problems.
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
From: "jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,alt.os.linux.suse,alt.os.linux.slackware
Subject: Re: *Great* Penguin photos for your linux wallpaper (in
alt.binaries.wallpaper)
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 22:37:18 +1200
Here's a link for Windows users who run Webshots.
http://www.webshots.com/photos/penguins1.html
"Dave Martel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> For anybody looking for some good linux wallpaper, "RtW" just posted
> some *gorgeous* high-res penguin photos to alt.binaries.wallpaper.
> Easy to find, the subject lines start with "Penguin".
>
------------------------------
From: "jim" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows is a virus
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 23:21:17 +1200
>
> Actualy, I for one would think that Windows does a delightful job of
> making money for Bill & Company; the data corruption is merely a lovely
> afterthought ("Corrupt data? Why not try Norton Utilities, or
> the WindowsDefragmentationThingy! [*] Or wait for Microsoft to fix it
> next release...") which gives myriad aftermarket possibilities for
> bodges, hacks, and shims...
>
Windows will make a delightful profit, and they deserve to, until this linux
craze can actually copy and paste properly between 2 windows without the
poor user wondering what gnome/kde/x/whatever app they happened to install
and making a mental note of the kernal version/video card/sound
card/printerversion of xyz BEFORE performing the operation.
At this point in time Windows is a far, far superior desktop operating
system. I would enjoy watching a decent Lawyers' Secretary booting up Linux
and having a good cackle at StarOffice.
Look I run a partition of Linux and it excites me. I think it has great
potential, but as a desktop OS it is severely lacking. I never see this ng
actually making the IMPORTANT DIFFERENCE of a server and desktop operating
system. I think that Linux (as I have read in this newsgroup) makes a very
excellent and robust server. But what about the desktop?
IMPORTANT QUESTIONS:
Q: Why is Bill Gates rich?
A: Because he made the computer easier to access for the MAJORITY of users
Q: Why does Linux suck at drag-and-drop, copy-and-paste, User Interface
Conformity?
A: Because the developers develop using a myriad of libraries. Just like
Windows - (which are sometimes called DLLs)
However at the end of all this, I think that Windows has been pushing the
Hardware side of the computer industry for a long time now. I think Linux
will be good for the hardware side - the more people that demand open source
when it comes to HARDWARE, the better.
And so ends my rave.
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:39:15 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Donn Miller"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>stem performs poorly compared to Windows 98 SE.
>
> OK, I WILL agree with you on that point. This machine is a P166, 64
> megs RAM, and the last time I tried xine w/XFree86 with a 42 meg music
> MPEG video, it was dropping frames like crazy. It looked like a slide
> show. But Media Player under Win ME suffered very little frame lossage.
> Amazing. Of course, remember that MS tuned Windows ME specifically for
> this sort of thing. ME is not very good in general, because most things
> seem too damned slow on ME. But when it comes to playing videos (both
> RealPlayer, Windows Media, and MPEG music video), Windows ME has been
> outstanding. I find ME unusable for much else. Well, you know that
> MediaPlayer is probably using some sort of direct access to the video HW
> for optimum performance, so Windows does outshine Linux in this respect.
>
> Unfortunately, there's much more to computing than multimedia, so I only
> reboot into Windows to play music mpeg vid's. Of course, you know that
> music videos are much more demanding on CPU time than MPEG movies,
> right, because now you've got a continuous stream of sound as well as
> the video portion itself to deal with.
>
> Therefore, I will agree Windows is faster at some tasks, but overall,
> Linux is faster on limited HW.
It's probably a driver issue. Given the distros Pete mentioned this would
be X4.0x, which has the Xvideo extensions. However some grapics card
drivers don't support Xvideo yet (nVidia since version 0.9-769), so xine
obviously defaults to Xshm (shared memory, at least that's what it
reported on my system before I upgraded my drivers). This means also that
a lot of image processing is dumped on the processor.
After I had upgraded my nVidia drivers (they now support both Xvideo and
Xrender), my system load (on a PIIIkatmai 500, 128M) rarely goes over 25%
playing MPEG and playback is smooth.
Question is: what video card is in your machines? It might help upgrading
to the most recent drivers.
Mart
--
Write in C, write in C,
Write in C, yeah, write in C.
Only wimps use BASIC, Write in C.
http://www.orca.bc.ca/spamalbum/
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 23:44:10 +1200
>> How about multimedia?
>
> I've noticed on my faster machine (400MHz PII) Linux + XFree86 doesn't
> play MPG files very well. On Windows 98 SE they work just fine. Overall
> graphics on thius system performs poorly compared to Windows 98 SE.
>
On my machine, (PIII 550Mhz, w/ 384MB RAM, 60gig 7200rpm hdd, 50x CDROM,
CD-R, TNT 2 128bit AGP graphics card, Sound Blaster Live!, 56K external
modem), I tried to run a ASF file on Windows 2000, frames constantly being
dropped, totally out of sync. I closed every back ground task, such as the
menu thingy for Wordperfect 2000, and tried again, still frames were being
lost. I then tried a Real Media Player, still I had the same problem, no
matter what I did, it never improved. Installed Linux, loaded RealPlayer,
and played a Real Media file, perfect play back, and no frames lost, and
the whole clip remained in sync.
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ian Davey)
Subject: Re: Windows 2000 - It is a crappy product
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:48:12 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Chris Ahlstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Edward Rosten wrote:
>>
>> >> This could go on forever.....
>> >
>> > No, it can't. Both things are more easily done via a GUI. Note, not more
>> > easily *programed* via GUI (I hate doing GUI work), but they are easier
>> > to use that way.
>>
>> I don't agree, but here's another example.
>>
>> Find all text files on the system.
>>
>> I'm not talking about all files ending in .txt, but all text files.
>>
>> find -print0 | xargs -n1 -0 file | grep text
>>
>> How the hell would you do that in a GUI?
>
>With a GUI "front-end" to "find", nyuk nyuk!!!!
And just think what a monstrosity that would be :-) It would take minutes of
painstaking searching through tabs to construct the command, only to find that
one last step you require isn't possible: dump the list to a text file, to a
printer, or to my new Acme text indexing program.
ian.
\ /
(@_@) http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/ (dark literature)
/(&)\ http://www.eclipse.co.uk/sweetdespise/libertycaptions/ (art)
| |
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jonadab the Unsightly One)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: Could Linux be used in this factory environment ?
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 11:47:48 GMT
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It should? I didn't realize they had optical sensors that allowed the
> terminals to notice when someone was looking at the terminal or not.
Oh, that's easy. If they don't press a key in over twenty
minutes, you go to a blank screen until they press a key.
If they don't notice the blank screen in ten minutes, they're
not looking at it, so you automatically reset the terminal.
> That "page"? We're talking about a standalone application versus HTML.
Page, screen, menu, record, file, function, whatever. I was
trying to be general, since obviously the precise content of
the CRT display will vary from application to application.
- jonadab
------------------------------
From: Matthew Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux is paralyzed before it even starts
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 23:50:33 +1200
I competed a four year degree, Bachelor of Business Computing, using only
Linux on my machine, if I can do it, I'm sure anyone can. Most of the OS
module covered UNIX, programming focused around C/C++, yes, there were
Word, Powerpoint, Excel and Access, however, we didnot learn Word etc, we
learnt the fundamentals behind each application, thus, when we did leave
University, we weren't tied to one particular OS or Office Suite.
Matthew Gardiner
--
Disclaimer:
I am the resident BOFH (Bastard Operator From Hell)
If you don't like it, you can go [# rm -rf /home/luser] yourself
Running SuSE Linux 7.1
The best of German engineering, now in software form
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Windows is a virus
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 13:51:16 +0100
> Windows will make a delightful profit, and they deserve to, until this
> linux craze can actually copy and paste properly between 2 windows
> without the poor user wondering what gnome/kde/x/whatever app they
> happened to install and making a mental note of the kernal version/video
> card/sound card/printerversion of xyz BEFORE performing the operation.
FUD. Left button to select, middle to paste, right to do a larger select.
It has always worked under X.
I've deard some laughable claims, but needing to know the sound card in
order to copy and paste has to be one of the funniest yet. Keep it up,
dude.
> At this point in time Windows is a far, far superior desktop operating
> system.
In what way. For me, Linux is the far superior desktop OS. Face it, mate,
this is a matter of opinion. There is no `best'.
> I would enjoy watching a decent Lawyers' Secretary booting up
> Linux and having a good cackle at StarOffice.
erm, why?
-Ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
