Linux-Advocacy Digest #282, Volume #34 Mon, 7 May 01 04:13:06 EDT
Contents:
Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux ("Edward Rosten")
Re: A Windows enthusiasts take on Mundie's speech (Ketil Z Malde)
Re: Windows makes good coasters (GreyCloud)
Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Linux a Miserable Consumer OS ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Windows makes good coasters (GreyCloud)
Re: Apple is doing a good thing ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Yet another IIS security bug ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft! ("Edward Rosten")
Re: Windows makes good coasters ("Tom Wilson")
Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux (GreyCloud)
Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux (GreyCloud)
Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT ("Mart van de Wege")
Re: the Boom, Boom department (GreyCloud)
Re: Shared library hell (Perry Pip)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 09:35:35 +0100
<snip>
> whole story of CPU porting problems, but then I know sod-all about the
> problems of different size integers from platform to platform.
Assembler is by no means the only problem.
There are a whole host of problems, such as making false assumptions
about the sizeof an integer and char.
sizeof(char)==1 by definition
and CHAR_BITS >= 8
and CHAR_MAX <=SHORT_MAX <=INT_MAX <=LONG_MAX <=LONG_LONG_MAX (now in
C99)
however, it is possible to have a stadards conforming compiler, where
sizeof(long long)==1 (CRAY had one, for instance and many DSP processors
have them as well).
I think quite a few programs assume that CHAR_MAX == 255 and will break
if otherwise.
Another problem is the endianness, for instance
a<<1 is *2 on one platform and /2 on another platform.
-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
------------------------------
Subject: Re: A Windows enthusiasts take on Mundie's speech
From: Ketil Z Malde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 07:35:21 GMT
"Erik Funkenbusch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Oh, just as a follow up, how can a GPL program fork?
For political reasons or because of technical disagreement. Just like
under the BSD. It's rare, but it happens.
> The GPL does not require changes to be "handed back to the author". In
> fact, you don't have to give the author anything. You only need to give the
> code to the people you give your software to (including changes), which may
> or may not be the original author.
While true, this is a bit irrelevant. If you don't distribute,
there's hardly a fork. And since redistribution can't be stopped, a
distributed patch is very available to the author as well.
But yes, there's no guarantee he'll include it in his source - for
political or technical reasons.
-kzm
--
If I haven't seen further, it is by standing in the footprints of giants
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:35:59 -0700
Tom Wilson wrote:
>
> "Chad Myers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:5aoJ6.8767$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:YLmJ6.127$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > <snip>
> >
> > > > In any case, every Windoze user I've talked to that burns CDs tells
> > > > me about how often they've coastered a CD. I've never coastered one
> > > > under Linux, so I have no intention of wasting my time booting to
> > > > Windoze 2000 to burn CDs. Windoze, even of the NT/2000 ilk, has too
> > > > high a peak interrupt latency to be worth risking a $0.50 CD-R.
> > > > You never know when Windoze will pop in and garbage collect,
> > > > and not respond to the CD interrupt in time. Windoze latency is
> > > > like 10 msec typical even in the most advanced desktop versions.
> > > > Linux latency, on the other hand, is measured in microseconds.
> > >
> > > At 10x burning speed under Linux the fifo's utilization seldom drops
> below
> > > 98% regardless of the load (System in question is 768MB, 30 GB 7200 RPM
> > > UDMA, PIII 866). The same system running Windows will often drop as low
> as
> > > 58% with no other tasks running and will, about 40% of the time, produce
> a
> > > frisbee. However, I don't know if this is attributable to Adaptec's
> burning
> > > software (Not so good, IMHO), or to the OS (Equally not-so-good).
> >
> > This is BS.
>
> Nope, not at all. Both of my CD Burners exhibit the same behavior under
> Windows and the same increase in reliability under Linux, using cdrecord
> (fed image info directly from mkisofs)
>
> >
> > I have a PII-400 with 256MB RAM and I can play Unreal Tournament while
> burning
> > a CD.
>
> THAT...is BS.
>
> > Except when I had a problem with my IDE channel, I've never seen EZ CD
> Creator's
> > buffer drop below 95% on any system I've used it on, including the old
> dual-
> > P200 I used to have. And I always am doing something while burning CDs.
> >
> > I usually take care not to do anything TOO intensive like compiling code
> or
> > copying the entire contents of a hard disk from one to another, and I've
> > never had a problem.
>
> My 166 box can dd an entire CD image, send another previously ripped cd
> image over to the PIII box via fast ethernet and burn a cd with my old 2x
> Phillips CDR drive simultaneously without a hiccup.(All of this controled
> via a dial-up PPP connection as I'm seldom at home anymore) Under Windows,
> I so much as try to access a floppy drive while burning and the thing goes
> haywire 40% of the time.
>
> >
> > Granted, EZ CD isn't a prize, but it's not that bad. And likewise, Windows
> > isn't either (Windows 2000 at least).
>
> EZ CD is pure, unadulterated garbage as is DirectCD.
Chad owns too much MS stock. He needs to divest his money.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 09:37:44 +0100
> I do not have any such problems, but again, I only work with Java
> applications.
Fair enough...
> I have no idea why anyone would use something other than Java for
> applicatons (unless we are talking about low level system utilites
> here).
More people know C. Some of us like pointers, too. C is faster. Some of
us don't like the enforced OO in java.
-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 a Miserable Consumer OS
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 09:40:56 +0100
>>>> No. The world is applications I want/need to use and even excluding
>>>> DAW ones,
>>> You said recently that apart from your audio apps, you only use
>>> **two** apps.
>>
>> Don't be mean. Poor flatty can't keep a thought in her head for 5
>> minutes.
> ^^^ its
About the only thing she has stuck to for any length of time is the claim
that she is female :-)
>> -Ed
> But Ed, I was being kind to SquishedBlowfish !
dopefish, more like :)
--
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: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:41:37 -0700
Steve Sheldon wrote:
>
> "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:YLmJ6.127$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > "Chris Ahlstrom" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> >
> > > In any case, every Windoze user I've talked to that burns CDs tells
> > > me about how often they've coastered a CD. I've never coastered one
> > > under Linux, so I have no intention of wasting my time booting to
> > > Windoze 2000 to burn CDs. Windoze, even of the NT/2000 ilk, has too
> > > high a peak interrupt latency to be worth risking a $0.50 CD-R.
> > > You never know when Windoze will pop in and garbage collect,
> > > and not respond to the CD interrupt in time. Windoze latency is
> > > like 10 msec typical even in the most advanced desktop versions.
> > > Linux latency, on the other hand, is measured in microseconds.
>
> Well now that's certainly interesting.
>
> I've been burning discs off my Windows 2000 server for quite some time.
>
> Never had a coaster due to the machine. It's a Gateway PPro200 with an
> Adaptec 2940 and a Yamaha CDRW drive. I even had the drive moved over to a
> P166MMX for a time, and again it worked flawlessly under Win2k although on
> that machine I couldn't do much else.
>
> I have had coasters due to bad media. Bought a package of 50 Sony discs
> they worked fine, bought another package 50% of them coastered, bought
> another package they worked fine. Even tried burning at single speed, and
> those suckers coastered... pretty sure it was the media.
Yep, blame it on the media. How bout the software driving the burner is
at fault or Even the CD burner itself is faulty. Like saying you can't
copy to your micro-floppy because a box of 50 floppies were bad.
>
> > At 10x burning speed under Linux the fifo's utilization seldom drops below
> > 98% regardless of the load (System in question is 768MB, 30 GB 7200 RPM
> > UDMA, PIII 866). The same system running Windows will often drop as low as
> > 58% with no other tasks running and will, about 40% of the time, produce a
> > frisbee. However, I don't know if this is attributable to Adaptec's
> burning
> > software (Not so good, IMHO), or to the OS (Equally not-so-good). One of
> > these days I plan to try Nero just to see, but, I find burning under Linux
> > to be so much better that it seems a waste of time to mess with it.
>
> Hmm. Again PPro200, Adaptec 2940, 192 Megs of RAM off a 7200 RPM 13 Gig
> drive. Just walked over fired up CD Copier, decided to make a backup copy
> of my Solaris 7 CD for some pointless pleasure.
>
> Hmm, processor utilization is only at about 5%. No noticeable spikes in any
> of the other system performance counters.
>
> How about making it a little tougher... Open up just about every management
> console app. Oh, and I think I'll photocopy the first page from the Ultrix
> FAQ using my scanner and the HP copying software that's on the same machine.
>
> Well whatdaya know, the CD is still burning fine without any buffer
> underruns. Processor and other counters spiked while running the other
> apps, but once they are done CD copier is back down to about 5% usage.
>
> Now granted this is only a 4x drive, but then again it's also only a 200Mhz
> machine running Win2k Server.
>
> Well that myth was easy to disprove. Oh yeah, just so you know I find
> burning under Linux to be so much more difficult to do that it's not even
> worth talking about.
>
> That and I don't have Linux loaded on any computer in my office right now.
> Ultrix on a DECstation - yes. Solaris 8 on a Sparc 10 - yes. Linux? - All
> my intel are belong to Win2k.
>
> Wheee!
It seems you have made a contradictory comment about how hard it is to
burn a CD under Linux. Yet you don't have Linux. What's the matter ...
too much MS stock. Divest.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Apple is doing a good thing
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 09:42:47 +0100
> Yes. Windows 98 was first intended to be the last 9x based product, but
> as Win2k grew, they realized they had too much on their plate. They had
> to cut a few things, and one of them was the consumer version, which is
> why Win98SE came out (which gives you an idea of exactly how long ago
> this was).
Was 98SE out in late 98 of in 1999?
> Hell, it was even before the name Windows 2000 existed. It was still
> called Windows NT 5 back then.
Changing the name doesn't change the OS.
>> > MS will stop selling 9x based OS's after XP is released.
>>
>> Like they did with Win2K.
>
> They didn't have a consumer version of Win2k. They DO have a consumer
> version of XP.
Yes, but it remains to be seen if it works. I think thay'll ahve a lot of
trouble since the rate of computer replacement is quite low.
-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: Yet another IIS security bug
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 09:43:43 +0200
Crossposted-To: alt.destroy.microsoft
In article <9d4obs$bti$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> (from what I've heard, a Mac would reduce me to a gibbering wreck).
>
> Not if you install Linux on it :-)
>
> -Ed
>
Good one, Ed! This had me in stitches.
Mart
--
Gimme back my steel, gimme back my nerve
Gimme back my youth for the dead man's curve
For that icy feel when you start to swerve
John Hiatt - What Do We Do Now
------------------------------
From: "Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Justice Department LOVES Microsoft!
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 09:45:30 +0100
> I find that my Epson worked just fine under linux going thru GS. No
> problems at all. Even PDF files printed quickly and were no problem.
Its not the printer driver thats the problem. Some PDFs seem to choke my
version of GS, but I've been through loads of PDFs recently.
-ed
--
You can't go wrong with psycho-rats.
u 9 8 e j r (at) e c s . o x . a c . u k
------------------------------
From: "Tom Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux.sux,alt.linux,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: Windows makes good coasters
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 07:45:00 GMT
"Edward Rosten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:9d5iqh$m13$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > I had a flaked-out 24x CD ROM that would go schitzo and literally eject
> > itself while the disk was spinning at full RPMS. They'd litterally fly
> > out of the thing.
>
> That is _so_ cool!. I would definitely keep that drive :-)
>
I thought the same thing too, in hindsight. After it totally trashed an NT
Workstation CD (No scratches...Gouges...Deep Ones... It was intercepted by
the coffee machine and the microwave), I promptly shutdown the system,
popped the case, removed the drive, marched straight to the dumpster, and
SLAMMED that sucker into it. Practically threw my arm out of socket. The
thing exploded all over the place.
After I calmed down, I regretted doing it as it would have made one hell of
a novelty item. (Making sure, of course, to only launch those worthless AOL
and MSN CDs across my office)
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:46:01 -0700
Richard Thrippleton wrote:
>
> First, let's get one thing straight; I'm not a wintroll. I don't
> even run windows on any machine I own. I am a committed a Linux advocate
> (and evangelist). But I am gonna rant (and there is foam coming out of my
> mouth). What pisses me off about quite a significant amount of Linux
> software is the ridiculous x86 bias, ridiculous to the point of ignorance
> of the existance of other CPUs.
> On many occasions, I have wasted much bandwidth and time
> obtaining sourcecode to some killer app, only to find that it will only
> compile on x86, and there is f***all warning in previous documentation.
> There seems to be some kind of arrogant view that Linux is only run on
> x86 (I use PPC). Some lamer has put in an ASM hack; that's fine, but would
> it really be too much trouble to put in a C substitute, or at least some
> >warning< next to that big hunk of megabytes large source code?? I
> have to use a modem half the year and this isn't helping!
> All I want is fair warning that they haven't taken into account CPUs
> other than their own. So those of you who know (or are) developers, _please_
> bang some heads and let people know that there are people who do not use
> x86s. Oh, and let them know that some people have their ints ordered the
> _right_ way round :>
>
> Richard
You've got a very good point! Yes, ASM hacks are what makes code
non-portable.
The programmer should at least explain his hacks with commented out
portable code.
I've run into the same thing getting Spice2g6 from DECCUS. A few MACRO
files is all it takes to render it useless on another platform.
--
V
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The _one_ thing that pisses me off about Linux
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:49:44 -0700
"k@k" wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] says...
>
> > On many occasions, I have wasted much bandwidth and time
> >obtaining sourcecode to some killer app, only to find that it will only
> >compile on x86.
>
> I do not have any such problems, but again, I only work with
> Java applications.
>
> I have no idea why anyone would use something other than Java for
> applicatons (unless we are talking about low level system utilites here).
True, but that's not this threads' point. If you download source and
try to compile it on a non x86 platform and then find out you've got
some ASM code for x86 in it... your out of luck.
--
V
------------------------------
From: "Mart van de Wege" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: The long slow slide to Microsoft.NOT
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 09:50:16 +0200
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,alt.destroy.microsoft
In article <Y6oJ6.8766$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Chad Myers"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> "Pancho Villa" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>> "T. Max Devlin" wrote:
>> >
>> COM is obviously a smoke-screen for combining that
>> > with CORBA-like functionality, as part of Bill Gates' "everybody will
>> > have to pay me money" campaign.
>> >
>> The fact of the matter is that COM and DCOM were MS ripoffs of IBM's
>> SOM and DSOM. OLE is simply bloated, buggy, 2nd-rate technology. To
>> this day, SOM and DSOM kick COM and DCOM's butt! Tragically, along
>> with IBM's OpenDoc, another fantastic technology, SOM and DSOM have
>> been pretty much destroyed by a criminal monopoly, and we are all
>> suffering. :(
>
> It's so amusing to watch people go to all lengths to ensure that
> Microsoft never gets any credit for anything.
>
> -c
>
>
Well Chad,
Fair's fair, Miguel Icaza from the Gnome project freely admits that the
bonobo component technology in Gnome is inspired by Microsofts COM. In
fact he once applied for a job at Microsoft before becoming a Free
software programmer.
Mart
--
Gimme back my steel, gimme back my nerve
Gimme back my youth for the dead man's curve
For that icy feel when you start to swerve
John Hiatt - What Do We Do Now
------------------------------
From: GreyCloud <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: the Boom, Boom department
Date: Mon, 07 May 2001 00:51:32 -0700
Darren Wyn Rees wrote:
>
> It is disappointing looking at the games installed with
> most of the current Linux distributions.
>
> Many of the games look, feel, and sound like some of the rubbish
> that was available ... err... over fifteen years ago for the
> old Sinclair Spectrum.
>
> Some of the material is so appalling, it reminds me of ZX81 games.
>
> Why ship silly old stocking-filler games with Linux ? Why not
> concentrate on creating a quality OS, instead of throwing in
> everything and the kitchen sink with a distribution ?
>
> I bought Loki's Civ for Linux over a year ago, and I've never bought
> a Linux game since it was so utterly awful.
>
> Linux just doesn't do anything for me in the boom, boom department.
>
> --
> "S+M is outta the question, have you got a better suggestion
> I'm fed up of waving my right hand" - rat salad www.ratsalad.co.uk
Go buy a Sony Playstation 2!
--
V
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Perry Pip)
Subject: Re: Shared library hell
Date: 7 May 2001 07:57:06 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 06 May 2001 20:23:54 GMT,
Pete Goodwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perry Pip wrote:
>
>> And where is the functionality of LD_PRELOAD and LD_LIBRARY_PATH under
>> windows?? Those in a wrapper script will fix any linking problem.
>
> Simple. You put the DLL in the application directory.
> Hey presto, it loads.
So then if you have multiple applications you end up with multiple
instances of the dll all over the place, completely defeating the
purpose of a shared library.
>No need to update any system environment variables.
Ever heard of a wrapper script?? No reason to update any system
environment variables under Linux either.
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
