Linux-Development-Sys Digest #367, Volume #6 Tue, 2 Feb 99 19:14:22 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux on ARM7 ?? (Roger Gammans)
I'm confused. ("Dr. Unk")
Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows (Frank Hale)
Re: sendmail-8.9.2 claims that "seteuid" is broken - True? (bill davidsen)
Re: Notif-0.1 (Tim Smith)
NT mouse frenzy related to mouse type? (was: Modest next goal (Matthias Warkus)
Re: I'm confused. (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Linux apps in win2000 port news! (Bill Crosby)
Re: New free widget library: Notif-0.1 (Johan Kullstam)
A question about Intel... ("][ndigo - Stormy blue sky")
use theramin as input device (steve mcadams)
egcs 2.91.60 and the 2.2.1 kernel. (mlw)
Re: use theramin as input device (Eric Miller)
Re: BeOS and Linux (Tim Smith)
Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Ignorant Socalists (was disheartened gnome developer) (David Fox)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Arthur)
Re: disheartened gnome developer (Matthias Warkus)
why does `stat' make the disk spin? (Kasper Peeters)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Roger Gammans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.arm
Subject: Re: Linux on ARM7 ??
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 19:41:59 +0000
In article <79491p$qje$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
>Hello Everybody
>
>One big Q .. err small Q... is linux available for ARM7/TDMI
>processor..
Arm - Linux uses instructions from the `core' Arm architecture, and has
been ported to almost all the architecture revisions. In general though
it works on those processor cores you tell the compiler to generate code
for - although there are a couple of different files right down at the
deepest layer for the differences between the 26./32 bit CPU modes and
also the SA which has a Harvard cache.
>I m not sure about what this TDMI means...
Ah. Essentially it means the processor has the thumb and extra multiply
instruction set features. The armlinux kernel doesn't use these to date.
And is unlikely to use the thumb set for some time since I don't think
binutils supports them yet.
Although this doesn't preclude you using them yourself in userspace or
own your own device drivers.
BTW, This means you will need a 32bit wide memory system since the
kernel won't be using the thumb instructions. (At least I think so, I
haven't done any hardware myself with the 7tdmi).
[Follow-ups Set]
--
Roger Gammans
------------------------------
From: "Dr. Unk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: I'm confused.
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 02:32:31 -0800
Ok, I may be ignorant, so don't bash my head in for that. I have a couple
of topics I need clarified.
1. Is egcs-1.1.1 and all it's other addons stable enough for production?
If not which gcc should I get?
2. I'm not too clear on the 3 glibc versions I've seen, which one is
stable (2.0.6, 2.0.7pre6, 2.0.112)? What are the differences?
3. I need a minimal-list of the packages to make a distribution free
system. I currently have the list for the GNU version 0.2 system. Is there
a place that I can get samples of all the configuration files, do they come
with the packages they use?
------------------------------
From: Frank Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows
Date: 2 Feb 1999 02:11:09 GMT
"Paul E. Lehmann" enlightened us with this:
> You can get all the Unix utilities and even run a Korn shell in NT by using
> software such as MKS Toolkit
> Why put up with the pain of Unix or Linux when you can have all the
> so-called advantages and a hell of a lot friendlier user environment and a
> hell of a lot more versatile environment. Pearl, sed, awk, grep, vi -
> piping, redirection - they are all there without the Nerdy Unix environment.
> Sorry folks - Unix and Linux are about 20 years behind times and will NEVER
> catch up.
So your saying Linux/Unix is 20 years behind the times. But then your
contradicting yourself by saying you can use the Linux/Unix tools on Win
NT. If Linux/Unix is so far behind then why the hell are you advocating
using tools to emulate Linux/Unix commands on NT?
This is the same pointless argument of Linux users hating Microsoft, but
vice versa. You hate Linux/Unix but you want to use the same tools on
WinNT. That makes a hell of alot of since.
--
From: Frank Hale
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
ICQ: 7205161
Website: http://www.franksstuff.com/
"I say line-ux you say lynn-ux,
whats the difference? Its still better than windows"
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (bill davidsen)
Subject: Re: sendmail-8.9.2 claims that "seteuid" is broken - True?
Date: 2 Feb 1999 19:43:01 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Olav Woelfelschneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Waldek Hebisch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| WH> I think that the problem is in seteuid spec, and Linux probably violates
| WH> BSD 4.3 spec. Linux behavior allows to
| WH> drop root privilleges. Changing this would possibly open security
| WH> holes in some programs.
|
| So do I have any chance to switch back and forth between root and non-root
| by other means?
This is a good time to read the man pages on setuid, seteuid and
setreuid...
The quick answer is "I think so," if you use seteuid() to change to the
non-root id you should be able to switch back, while if you use setuid()
you can't. Note that the behaviour if you start as root is not the same
as if you don't.
Yes, it's all very complex.
--
bill davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
There are those who make things happen, those who watch things happen,
and those who wonder what happened.
-- idea from _Pickles_
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Notif-0.1
Date: 2 Feb 1999 02:55:28 -0800
Frank Hale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I tried it again and it still doesn't work for me, It will resolve to
>the IP but it never connects, I guess it times out. Do you have any
>mirror sites? I would like to take a look at the toolkit.
Don't use Netscape.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: NT mouse frenzy related to mouse type? (was: Modest next goal
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 17:58:39 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Sun, 31 Jan 1999 20:31:11 +0100...
..and Per Olsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus) writes:
>
> > Hold a mouse button down and see how Windows goes into a frenzy while
> > you are holding it. What does it do, BTW - poll for the release event?
>
>
> In what way does it go into a frenzy? I run Windows NT 4.0 Server (I'm
> reading this group because I will give Linux a try as soon as I get a
> suitable machine.) I hold a mouse button down and doesn't notice raised CPU
> load, slower performance on running apps or such.
>
> P200MMX 192Mb RAM PS/2 Mouse
Maybe it depends on the type of mouse?
Perhaps the PS/2 mouse handler is somewhat smarter than the serial
mouse driver?
mawa
--
Matthias Warkus | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Dyson Spheres for sale!
My Geek Code is no longer in my .signature. It's available on e-mail request.
It's sad to live in a world where knowing how to program your VCR actually
lowers your social status...
------------------------------
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: I'm confused.
Date: 02 Feb 1999 14:51:31 -0500
"Dr. Unk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ok, I may be ignorant, so don't bash my head in for that. I have a couple
> of topics I need clarified.
>
> 1. Is egcs-1.1.1 and all it's other addons stable enough for production?
> If not which gcc should I get?
yes. egcs is good. it's not perfect but neither are the old gcc
versions. the 2.0.x kernel series needs gcc 2.7.2.x but since 2.2.x
is out, i don't see much reason not to upgrade.
> 2. I'm not too clear on the 3 glibc versions I've seen, which one is
> stable (2.0.6, 2.0.7pre6, 2.0.112)? What are the differences?
2.0.6 is the last release of a glibc. 2.0.7pre6 is some patches which
fix problems in 2.0.6. i have no idea if the fsf has any intention of
releasing a 2.0.7. 2.0.112 is a warm up to the impending glibc
2.1.x.
i'd use 2.0.7pre7 or 2.0.112. the redhat glibc 2.0.7 from redhat 5.2
has been good to me. i have no experience with 2.0.112 but haven't
heard horror stories either.
> 3. I need a minimal-list of the packages to make a distribution free
> system.
what's wrong with a distribution? what does it really mean to be
distribution free?
the main job of a distribution is to plant a critical mass of linux
and gnu tools onto your hard drive. once this is acheived, do what
you like. you are now free.
start with a distribution which does most of what you want. if you
dislike the package manager, don't use it. if you are unhappy with
the init scripts, redo them. don't want binaries you didn't compile
yourself, recompile them.
> I currently have the list for the GNU version 0.2 system. Is there a
> place that I can get samples of all the configuration files, do they
> come with the packages they use?
hmm i am not sure what the gnu version 0.2 system even is. are you
refering to the hurd?
--
johan kullstam
------------------------------
From: Bill Crosby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.hardware,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux apps in win2000 port news!
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 12:32:45 -0800
Ya, Hummingbird Communications has been doing this for awhile. Its fair, but no where
compares to the Linux OS. Linux X11 emulating a MS environment is more
stable than MS Windows emulating a X11 Linux environment. NT crashes (BSOD) too much
when pushed by heavy apps.
http://www.hummingbird.com/products/nc/exceed/index.html
M Sweger wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Just saw on the biz wire that a company http://www.interix.com has
> developed a 64 bit application that runs a a unix/linux emulator within
> the MSoft Win2000 (NT5.0) platform environment. They want alot of
> Linux apps ported to their API interface so that Unix runs within Windows.
> Seems kind of ironic since Linux is trying to run Windows apps in Unix;
> but we don't have the source code to their stuff, but they have ours.
> Hmmm! seems like there isn't any competition again. Msoft is supporting them
> though.
>
> They have a limited list of things they want ported such as gcc (all compilers and
>assemblers) and emacs and Tex to name a few. You have 2.5 months to do it
> by -- they end of January 1999. Anything else is nice but they won't pay for.
> Those they'd like you to port will only pay a maximum of $1000 to a cheap
> payment of $500. They didn't mention [conveniently] that they would like the
> linux kernel or Sunos x86 kernel etc to run within the interix Win2000.
> The reason it was supposed to be done by the end of January 1999 (now past)
> is due to todays press release about this product.
>
> Hmmm! if you can't get the Unix software vendors to port their stuf from Unix
> to Window Nt, then make the Unix apps run within NT! In this way you can
> say that your OS is a engineering workstation.
>
> --
> Mike,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.windows.x,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: New free widget library: Notif-0.1
Date: 02 Feb 1999 15:01:35 -0500
> Emile van Bergen wrote:
> > 4. What is the fundamental difference between a keyboard full of buttons
> > and a window full of buttons? No system that I know of has an
> > keyboard-interrupt handler with which you can register a function that
> > will be called if key 'A' is pressed, an another function if key 'B' is
> > pressed. (The most annoying thing would be if the key in question
> > wouldn't be passed as an argument, otherwise you could create just one
> > callback for all keys which simply puts the key in a FIFO queue). No,
> > this would be regarded brain dead, but its the standard in
> > GUI's. WHY?
emacs does this. emacs has done it for years on systems which predate
windowing. an excert from my .emacs
(global-set-key [insert] 'yank)
(global-set-key [home] 'beginning-of-line)
(global-set-key [end] 'end-of-line)
(global-set-key [f5] 'isearch-forward-regexp)
(global-set-key [f6] 'query-replace-regexp)
(global-set-key [f9] 'compile)
(global-set-key [f10] 'tmm-menubar)
(global-set-key [S-f10] 'toggle-menu-bar-mode)
the global-set-keys bind the functions to the key. these functions
are called when you press that key. i do think that the key is passed
as an argument to the function, hence the usual keys call a
self-insert function.
i think the problem with the call-backs is not the call-back per se,
but the awkwardness of setting it up in C/C++.
--
johan kullstam
------------------------------
From: "][ndigo - Stormy blue sky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: A question about Intel...
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 11:50:22 +0100
I've heard that Intel high-end processors, like PentiumII and PentiumPro,
work as a sort of RISC processor that emulate an 80x86 processor. I mean
that 80x86 code should be translated into another kind of instructions,
based on a more simple instruction set, such as RISC sets...
I'm sure that other manufacturers tried this before (NexGen should have
been the first who tried this kind of thing).
My questions are these:
* Can I directly work with this set of instructions? (= Can I work with a
PentiumII or an AMD K6 treating them as RISC processors?)
* Could be this change in the instruction set a way to increase
performances?
Thank you for your answers.
Bye.
Computer Science Department /|\ Dipartimento di Informatica
University of Verona / | \ Universita' di Verona
______________________________/_|__|__|_\______________________________
|| | | || _ |==|==|==|==| _ || | | ||
||____|_____|____|| [_] |__|__|__|__| [_] ||____|_____|____||
||__|_|__|__|_|__|| | | | | | ||__|_|__|__|_|__||
|| | | || |==|==|==|==| || | | ||
||____|_____|____|| |__|__|__|__| ||____|_____|____||
||__|_|__|__|_|__|| |==|==|==|==| ||__|_|__|__|_|__||
|| | | || o o o |--|--|--|--| o o o || | | ||
||____|_____| || o o o |__|__|__|__| o o o || |_____|____||
||__|_|__|__|____|| o o o | | | | | o o o ||____|__|__|_|__||
__||__________|____||_________|__|__|__|__|_________||____|__________||__
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or [EMAIL PROTECTED]
WWW Page: arena.sci.univr.it/~bellomi/michele/main.htm
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (steve mcadams)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: use theramin as input device
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 21:15:14 GMT
Does anyone know of any work that has been done with the idea of using
a theramin for an input/pointing device? -steve
========================================================
so what? - http://www.codetools.com/showcase
------------------------------
From: mlw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: egcs 2.91.60 and the 2.2.1 kernel.
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 21:42:53 +0000
I know what I am doing is "bad" but, I compiled the 2.2.1 kernel with
egcs. It seems to work, even with the XFree86 Mach64 server.
Anyone have any experience with this? Anyone know any hard core facts
why this is a bad idea?
--
Mohawk Software
Windows 95, Windows NT, UNIX, Linux. Applications, drivers, support.
Visit the Mohawk Software website: www.mohawksoft.com
------------------------------
From: Eric Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: use theramin as input device
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 13:51:00 -0800
steve mcadams wrote:
>
> Does anyone know of any work that has been done with the idea of using
> a theramin for an input/pointing device? -steve
> --------------------------------------------------------
> so what? - http://www.codetools.com/showcase
Wouldn't that be making the easy, difficult? Most theramins I've seen
are bigger than a mouse and keyboard, and would require two hands to use
(unlike a mouse). A novel idea, but just plain silly.
--
Eric G. Miller
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.tidepool.com/~egm2
=========================================================
In vino veritas [In wine there is truth]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: BeOS and Linux
Date: 2 Feb 1999 05:39:16 -0800
Martin Neumann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I don't think the BeOS GUI is better. The underlying technology of
>X11 is rather good (remote displays etc.). The real desktop is
What did you have in mind to justify that "etc" there? I can't think of
anything that is actually rather good in X11 except its support of remote
displays.
--Tim Smith
------------------------------
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Why I'm dumping Linux, going back to Windblows
Date: 02 Feb 1999 16:51:48 -0500
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi) writes:
> On Mon, 1 Feb 1999 21:02:54 -0500, Paul E. Lehmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >You can get all the Unix utilities and even run a Korn shell in NT by using
> >software such as MKS Toolkit
> >Why put up with the pain of Unix or Linux when you can have all the
> >so-called advantages and a hell of a lot friendlier user
> environment and a
windows isn't all that friendly. it depends on what you are trying to do.
> I really rather like dfm or wmfinder than exploder.
> My machine is also quite a bit more responsive now
> running Linux than it would be running either NT or
> '95. An IRQ conflict is still an IRQ conflict. All
> of my PCI hardware is auto-detected (or autoprobed).
> I DON'T like Windows NNTP and POP clients.
i see from your headers that you are using slrn. slrn exists in
windows nt. i am posting this from a gnus running in nt emacs. i
still do not enjoy windows as much as linux, but there are ports of
some of your favorite software.
> The only reason I have to run windows is games.
that and dealing with all the ms-word docs i get at work. (and no,
other wordprocessors do not do a good enough job at
importing/exporting once figures, tables and equations get thrown into
the mix.)
--
johan kullstam
------------------------------
From: d s f o x @ c o g s c i . u c s d . e d u (David Fox)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: Ignorant Socalists (was disheartened gnome developer)
Date: 02 Feb 1999 06:10:01 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco Anglesio) writes:
> If you consider Microsoft or any other company to be an arm of the
> *state*, then Microsoft or any other company is definitely in the
> socialist camp, but there's no reason (much less good reason) to consider
> Microsoft or any other company an arm of the state. Like I said before,
> they ignore the authority of the state. Nice try.
I think you may be confusing a disagreement over the nicities of
monopoly status with proud defiance of state authority.
--
David Fox http://hci.ucsd.edu/dsf xoF divaD
UCSD HCI Lab baL ICH DSCU
------------------------------
From: Arthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 15:09:12 -0800
Matthias Warkus wrote:
>
> It was the Mon, 01 Feb 1999 00:46:14 -0800...
> ..and Arthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Thank you - not everything in the world exists
> > because of or for the benefit of economics.
>
> May I put this into my soon-to-come .signature rotation?
Consider it in the public domain - not even GPL'd.
It was in response to:
Marco Anglesio wrote:
>
> On Sun, 31 Jan 1999 16:35:07 -0500, jerryn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Open Software and freeing source code isn't socialism.
>
> Isn't socialist. It's neither socialist nor capitalist; it just is.
which I think is more "quotable".
Arthur
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Matthias Warkus)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: disheartened gnome developer
Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 15:01:09 +0000
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It was the Mon, 01 Feb 1999 00:46:14 -0800...
..and Arthur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thank you - not everything in the world exists
> because of or for the benefit of economics.
May I put this into my soon-to-come .signature rotation?
mawa
--
Matthias Warkus | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Dyson Spheres for sale!
My Geek Code is no longer in my .signature. It's available on e-mail request.
It's sad to live in a world where knowing how to program your VCR actually
lowers your social status...
------------------------------
From: Kasper Peeters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: why does `stat' make the disk spin?
Date: 02 Feb 1999 23:38:35 +0000
Trying to minimize the disk access on my laptop, I noticed that a
simple stat (2) call makes it spin after a while. There is no
modification of the access time on the file, so I don't see why it has
to hit the disk at all. Does ext2fs do something extra that I don't
know about?
Kasper
------------------------------
** 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 (and comp.os.linux.development.system) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
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-Development-System Digest
******************************
