Linux-Hardware Digest #700, Volume #9 Fri, 19 Mar 99 04:13:51 EST
Contents:
Sound blaster Live driver. When will it be available? (Jens Sorensen)
Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers (Burkard B. Kreidler)
Re: SiS - has *anyone* got it working. (was Re: Help with Diamond SpeedStar A50 (SiS
6326AGP) (Allen)
Re: linux and CL RIVA TNT (Jeff Tacy)
Re: FS: DECSystem 5400 (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers (Bill Anderson)
Anyone have any experience with Intel DK440LX motherboard? ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers (doole)
Re: For all you Microsoft lovers (now about security) (John R. Campbell)
Re: Is Windows for idiots? (Re: X munges the graphics card?) (jedi)
Re: SB128 PCI -- How to configure new kernels? (Bradley Yen)
Re: 2.2.3, ess 1888, & insanity (Victor Sologoubov)
Re: Modem: no luck w/simple AT cmd (brett russ)
Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers ("liam toh")
Re: USR Courier V. Everything (G. Franklin McCullough)
Re: Is Windows for idiots? (Re: X munges the graphics card?) (Rene)
Re: AGP video cards (Daniel)
HP COLORADO 8GB ATAPI tape (Steve Johnson)
Re: Is Windows for idiots? (Re: X munges the graphics card?) (jedi)
Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers (doole)
error trying to edit kernel (Larry Robbins)
Re: STB Velocity 128 Video Card (Eric Peers)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Jens Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Sound blaster Live driver. When will it be available?
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:44:18 GMT
HI,
What is the current status of the Sound Blaster Live driver for linux.
Does any one know when it will be out? What is the time frame?
Thanks,
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Burkard B. Kreidler)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:59:00 GMT
>If you believe Microsofts answer/excuses, then you also believe in Santa
>Claus and the Tooth Fairy!
(OT)
Perhaps I believe in Santa Claus,
but never Billy's words
(/OT)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Allen)
Crossposted-To: linux.redhat.install,comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: SiS - has *anyone* got it working. (was Re: Help with Diamond SpeedStar
A50 (SiS 6326AGP)
Date: 19 Mar 1999 08:12:23 GMT
Does that version of X actually claim to support that card or chipset?
On 18 Mar 1999 12:39:06 +0000, Tommy Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Jason Lester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I've had similiar problems on other machines. I always delete all the
>> resolutions from the screen section that I don't use. If you want to use 800x600
>
>I'm having resolution problems with SiS 5598 on RH5.2. Some
>of the stuff that 'startx' spews out to STDERR (before actually
>running X at 320x200) says:
>
> SVGA: Mode "800x600" needs hsync freq of 35.16kHz. Deleted.(--)
>
>In fact *all* modes get "Deleted" like this, which is
>presumably why it then goes on to say:
>
> SVGA: Using builtin driver modes(--)
> SVGA: Builtin Mode: 320x200(--)
> SVGA: Virtual resolution set to 320x204(--)
> SVGA: SpeedUp code selection modified because virtualX != 1024
>
>Even if I frig XF86Config to have the correct hsync and
>vsync values (i.e. the ones it says it needs) and so get rid
>of those "Deleted" messages, still I get only low
>resolution.
>
>Is it significant that I also get an ominous "Unknown chipset"
>message (in that same STDERR):
>
> SVGA: PCI: SiS Unknown chipset (0x0200) rev 104, Memory @0xe1000000, 0xe1400000,
>I/O @ 0xe000(--)
> SVGA: chipset: generic(--)
> SVGA: videoram: 64k(**)
> SVGA: clocks: 25.18(**)
> SVGA: Using 8 bpp, Depth 8, Color weight: 666(--)
>
>I'm using 3.3.3.2 of XF86 and the monitor is by Daewoo and
>isn't mentioned anywhere on the planet as far as I can see.
>
>t
Allen
(email addy; user ID portion has a numeral one in place of word
onespoiler, and of course, delete the bogus secondary domain of nospam.)
PC/hardware Guru, and Linux Newbie
------------------------------
From: Jeff Tacy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: linux and CL RIVA TNT
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:46:55 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
XFree86 supports the TNT just fine for me, so I would assume that you
are using an earlier revision of X that doesn't have the driver for it.
Get the latest version; I believe 3.3.3.1 is the latest. Good luck.
-Jeff
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
JC wrote:
>
> Anyone know when there may be an update in Linux to support the CL Riva TNT
> AGP video card?
>
> Is there perhaps another work-around ... perhaps using something other than
> Xfree86??
>
> Thanks
>
> JC.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thor Lancelot Simon)
Crossposted-To:
misc.forsale.computers.workstation,comp.sys.dec,comp.os.vms,comp.unix.ultrix
Subject: Re: FS: DECSystem 5400
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:56:27 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Kent Rankin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>The following system is located in Knoxville, TN, 37922-3449 and is up
>for immediate sale:
>
> Digital DECSystem 5400
> 2 MIPS R3000 processors at 30MHz
And unfortunately, IIRC, it's so starved for memory bandwidth that it'd
run faster if you took one of them out. This is the "MIPSFair" machine
that was built from a small SMP VAX, right? Where the VAX types who
built it didn't understand that if you had a CPU that could actually *do*
anything, it might have nontrivial memory bandwidth requirements? :-)
> 32MB RAM
> DSSI and SMD support
> Onboard Ethernet
> QBUS support
> RA90 drive(1 GB)
> 4 1.2GB Seagate Sabre Drives in external
> cabinet
> TK70 Tape drive
>
> Currently running Ultrix 4.3 for RISC
> Can run VMS 7.1, if anyone is interested in
> that sort of thing. =)
No, it can't! Not unless you tear the CPU boards out and put the ones in
from the similar VAX. And even that might not work.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"And where do all these highways go, now that we are free?"
------------------------------
From: Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:59:48 GMT
doole wrote:
>
> Tim Dean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> apparently said this:
> >
> >surely 'why not?' is an equally appropriate question here... and in many
> >cases you could replace the word 'need' with 'want' which is just as
> >valid.
> >
>
> If I'm a cop and I'm under all of those pressures and trying to get to
> some pervert, I don't give a crap what you want; I'm just trying to
> get the job done. Maybe I look in the wrong place once in a while. If
> I knew in advance where to look, we wouldn't be having these problems.
>
> And if I'm not a cop (and I'm not) I WANT him/her to get the job done.
>
> Don't you? I don't "want" the cops to be up against any more than they
> already are.
>
> Sorry, but I'm right.
wtf was that all about??
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware
Subject: Anyone have any experience with Intel DK440LX motherboard?
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:45:32 GMT
I recently stumbled across the Intel DK440LX motherboard which
provides dual pII capability, onboard SCSI, sound and ethernet. Best
of all they can be had as cheap as $130! This almost seems to good to
be true -- somebody pinch me please!
I'm pretty sure the SCSI is supported in Linux since it uses the
Adaptec 7895 chipset, but I'm less sure about the ethernet and
"Soundblaster Compatable" sound. Has anyone used this motherboard?
What have your experiences been with it?
Thanks in advance...
-p.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (doole)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:59:52 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bill Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> apparently said this:
>
>wtf was that all about??
<g> Not Linux, unfortunately. Time to get back to the point, I guess.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John R. Campbell)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: For all you Microsoft lovers (now about security)
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:45:38 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Sun, 14 Mar 1999 20:44:24 GMT, John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>doole writes:
>>Rufus V. Smith writes:
>>>The point is that sometimes innocent people need their privacy.
>> From Authorities? Why??
>
>"Authorities" with a capital "A", eh? Who do you think these "Authorities"
>are, God? Why should the fact that someone is employed by one of those
>organizations that you label an "Authority" give him the right to read my
>private files?
Perhaps, if there is no need for *any* form of privacy, we
should all send our messages via postcard, using the most
efficiently OCR'd font possible, so that the "Authorities"
know that we're knuckling under.
As for "Authorities", who do you trust? All organizations
that *I* know of are composed of human beings. If any of
them took an interest in me I would not like to have all of
my life open for examination...
Remember what McCarthy taught us all in the fifties- even
someone with a "clean" record can have it mis-interpreted
and twisted to suit an "Authorities" goals.
The Bill of Rights in the US isn't just a good idea- It's
the law (all of which are threatening to the "Powers that Be"
which explains why they are all threatened).
As for Linux, it'd be interesting to have a physical key (like
a PCMCIA slot in the front panel) for a PGP decryptor card so
that we can have encrypted filesystems, though I'd be concerned
that such a device can be "spoofed" (though an Open Source
environment is much like a "free society"- I can protect others
because I'm protecting myself).
Now...
Have I muddied the waters enough?
--
John R. Campbell Speaker to Machines [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- As a SysAdmin, yes, I CAN read your e-mail, but I DON'T get that bored!
Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are those of John Campbell alone and
do not reflect the opinions of his employer(s) or lackeys
thereof. Anyone who says differently is itching for a fight!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Is Windows for idiots? (Re: X munges the graphics card?)
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:44:21 GMT
On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 02:32:19 GMT, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Amen...A word that is mentioned quite infrequently in this group,
>productivity.
>
>
>It doesn't matter a hill of beans how technically superior your OS is
>if there are no applications for it that the general public want to
>use.
>
>Vi, And EMacs and ppp-on, ppp-off, and slrn and tin an trn and tetris
>and ispell and on and on and on don't cut it when you have a plethora
>of Windows applications that blow the doors off the Linux crap...
>Users are NOT interested in going back to the 1970's....
Of course not. Word Perfect using secretaries might
actually be expected to actually produce again.
For some jobs, 'going back to the 70s' is the right
thing to do. At least the machines were reliable then.
>
>
>
>On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 01:30:09 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Falis) wrote:
>
>><7chjmb$f6o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>>Sorry about the empty prior reply.
>>
>>On 14 Mar 1999 19:20:41 -0500, Guess Who <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> I would never be so cruel as to throw a rank beginner to the mercies
>>> of the unix command line. But anyone who tries to do serious work
>>> with Windows or Mac is kidding himself.
>>
>>You must have a pretty strange idea of what serious work is. We field IDE's on
>Windows as well as various Unices for various kinds of applications including hard
>>real-time, multi-million line applications, and safety-critical applications. And I
>daresay our Windows hosted versions are more pleasant to use than the UNIX ones.
>>Personally, I've always found the UNIX "user" level environment to be a distraction
>from getting serious work done - and I've done some serious work on it since the
>>early 80's. I've also seen an awful lot of people who are UNIX-philes waste a lot
>of time dicking around with their GUI and other configuration settings instead of
>getting
>>their purported work done.
>>
>>I guess my definition of serious is concentrating on the job at hand. So, if I have
>to spend more time thinking about the environment in which I'm doing it because it
>>_intrusively_ offers a lot of configurable bells and whistles I'm not interested in,
>I resent it. It's not serious, just seriously distracting.
>>
>>Can't argue taste, right? But your last statement is just BS, raising your own
>preference to the level of absolute truth.
>>
>>- Ed
>
--
"I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die |||
while you discuss this a invasion in committe." / | \
In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
From: Bradley Yen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SB128 PCI -- How to configure new kernels?
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:47:10 GMT
I didn't have any problems getting my SB128 to be reconized (I'm a newbie using
Linux Mandrake 5.3 distribution).
I've upgrade my kernel to 2.2.3 from the initial 2.036 that was installed. I
run sndconfig to setup the soundcard on my system. Sndconfig reconized that I
had a soundcard in my system, but it didn't know which one. I had to manually
select the es1370 soundcard driver from the list it gave.
If you're using sndconfig, it says you should compile your kernel with sound as
modules.
Mike Dowling wrote:
> I believe that there is a means of getting the SoundBlaster128 PNP card to
> work with the newer kernels, but I have not succeeded yet. Any help is much
> appreciated.
--
Bradley Yen / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / ICQ# 804442
http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/Corner/9375
------------------------------
From: Victor Sologoubov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: 2.2.3, ess 1888, & insanity
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:47:21 GMT
I have the similar problem with ess1868. When I run
maplay on a heavy loaded system, it sometimes displays
Sound: DMA (output) timed out - IRQ/DRQ config error?
I think it is a bug in the sound driver.
Partial solution for me was to edit driver/sound/dmabuf.c.
In function dmabuf_timeout I replaced the line
tmout += HZ/5; /* Some safety distance */
with
tmout += HZ; /* Some safety distance */
and recompiled modules.
Victor Sologoubov
=======================================================
In article <7cdb0v$5rp$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Herbert Ho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> i've been having the strangest problems with my sound
card (ess 1888) under
> 2.2.3 kernel. it worked ok (kinda buggy, but worked)
under 2.0.36 but refuses
> to work now.
>
> i've tired compiling as modules and into the kernel. the
best i get is the
> ability to play ONE and ONLY ONE sound file. then it
gives me the error i get
> all the time:
>
> dma (output) timeout: IRQ/DRQ conflict?
>
> i'm sure this isn't a conflict. my /proc/interrupts:
>
> CPU0
> 0: 74022 XT-PIC timer
> 1: 1706 XT-PIC keyboard
> 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade
> 3: 2319 XT-PIC eth0
> 7: 1 XT-PIC soundblaster
> 12: 30668 XT-PIC PS/2 Mouse
> 13: 1 XT-PIC fpu
> 14: 32841 XT-PIC ide0
> 15: 4 XT-PIC ide1
> NMI: 0
>
> in addition, /dev/sndstat gives nothing helpful. just
states the driver as
> the ess 1688 when complied into kernel and the ess 1888
driver when in
> modules
>
> my /etc/conf.modules (part that pertains to sound):
>
> # sound information
> alias char-major-14 sb
> options sound dmabuf=1
> options sb io=0x220 irq=7 dma=1 dma16=5 esstype=1888
>
> the card works fine under win95. it just won't work
under 2.2.3. in
> addition, after getting the dma timeout message, no
program can write/read
> to/from the floppy device. whether its mounted or not.
i end up having to
> reboot to restore use of the device. why is this?
>
> preusing this newsgroup i've only found a few related
posts...and the only
> reply to the few were that the proprietory oss drivers
should be used. but
> the webpage for it doesn't even have support for the ess
1888. it seems only
> people have trouble w/ the ess 1688 and 1868 ...but not
this. has ANYONE
> gotten this to work?!?!
>
> ANY comments would be helpful. thanks in advanced.
>
> herbert ho
>
> "Just do me a favor, don't breed."
> -- Adam Carona, Loveline
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion
Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or
Start Your Own
>
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brett russ)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Modem: no luck w/simple AT cmd
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:47:23 GMT
Finally got it last weekend. The problem was not that there was no
response, it was just so slow that I was giving up before the command
was printed and the response came back. It took about 30 secs. Once
I changed the modem to use COM3 instead of COM1 (/dev/ttyS2) and IRQ4
it worked like a charm. Thanks to those who helped.
BR
------------------------------
From: "liam toh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:59:46 GMT
>>doole wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>Why should the fact that someone is employed by one of those
>>organizations that you label an "Authority" give him the right to read my
>>private files?
>But I say it again, why would you care what they read - UNLESS of
>course, you were committing a crime. No one wants to answer that
>question directly, for some stupid reason.
sending email isn't a crime but I don't want just anybody rifling through
it, nobody I know wants 'authorities' peeping into their mail. Browsing
pornography isn't a crime but nobody I know want 'authorities' to make it
their business to monitor someone's browsing activities. Actually screwing
my wife isn't a crime but we don't want the 'authorities' to have a camera
in our bedroom.
>You send loads of your private information to the IRS, and willingly.
>Why the hell isn't anyone complaining about THAT?
people are complaining, maybe you've heard of the republican party?
>Doesn't make sense.
??you think people in a free society dont cherish there personal privacy??
BTW doole: do you work for the IRS?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (G. Franklin McCullough)
Subject: Re: USR Courier V. Everything
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:47:08 GMT
On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 13:51:58 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (G. Franklin McCullough) wrote:
>> I installed Red Hat 5.2 recently and everything works great except my
>> modem which is the USR Courier V. Everything. It is a 33.6 upgraded
>> to 56K and V90. Works great under windows 95 with connect speeds up
>> to 52000. Under Linux it will only connect at 26400. I would
>> certainly appreciate any help from someone who has already went
>> through this problem.
>> thanks,
>>
>
>I have a V.Everything, also upgraded via the official USR Windows95 software
>and it connects to my ISP at 40.0 nearly every time using the V.90 protocol.
>
>It is difficult to see the connect speed in Windows. Relying on the system
>tray to tell you is not exactly accurate. Note that 52000 is roughly twice
>your 26400 rate. That could be a clue that you're not dialing in as fast as
>you expect.
>
>Of course, you could have done all this research already yourself and I could
>be going on and on about stuff you already know, but I just thought I'd put
>in my two cents.
>
>Good luck,
>Paul.
>
Thanks for the help Paul. As to the connection speed in Linux it is
noticeable slower than windows even if the windows tray does not give
exactly the right speed. Using wvdial in Linux it shows that I am not
in V90 or X2 mode so I am not sure exactly what is going on.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Rene)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Is Windows for idiots? (Re: X munges the graphics card?)
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:46:22 GMT
>I would never be so cruel as to throw a rank beginner to the mercies
>of the unix command line. But anyone who tries to do serious work
>with Windows or Mac is kidding himself.
Sorry, but this is - how shall I put it without hurting you - foolish.
Especially, since you included the Mac into a non-serious-worker
operating system. There are a lot of reasons to use Linux, but this
one is not among them.
Rene.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.x
Subject: Re: AGP video cards
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:46:14 GMT
>I'm about to build a new Linux system and I'm trying to figure out which
>video card to get. I'd like to get an AGP card, and am wondering what
>people's experiences have been with the different cards that are
>supported under XFree86?
>
>I'd also like to stick with a card that has a server with good
>acceleration so if you have comments about the server it would be
>appreciated also.
My 2 cents.
Last year I setup a system with a SiS 6326 AGP.
At the time XFree86 was at version 3.3.2 which
did not come with support for the card. I was able to
find a server for the card at the S.u.S.E. web site
but then soon after that 3.3.3 came out.
I was never very happy with this card. I could never
get more than 256 color unless I ran it at 800x600.
Last month I dumped the SiS and bought a Viper 550 AGP.
Now I'm pulling 1600x1200 with 16 million colors.
I haven't tried any other AGP cards but I'm more than
pleased with the Diamond Viper 550 AGP. And I will
stay away from the SiS 6326 chip set.
-Daniel
------------------------------
From: Steve Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: HP COLORADO 8GB ATAPI tape
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:48:07 GMT
Does anyone have a HP COLORADO 8GB ATAPI tape drive working under 2.2.3? I'm
able to read and write files to/from it, but tape positioning does not work.
When doing a 'mt -f /dev/nht0 fsf 1' the ioctl() will return 0, but the tape
drive does nothing. Also, it appears that end-of-file marks are not being
written. 'mt status' will return (for example) 'File number=0, block
number=51913'. The file number will never be > 0, even if a 'mt weof' is run.
The current version of mt is mt-st-0.5-1 under RedHat 5.2.
Thanks for any pointers.
- Steve (remove XsXpXaXm in return address)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
Crossposted-To:
comp.lang.java.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Is Windows for idiots? (Re: X munges the graphics card?)
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:48:10 GMT
On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 14:45:42 GMT, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Actually Wp 5.1 (DOS) was my favorite version and with the exception
>of graphics, any secretary worth her (his) salt knew how to make that
>program dance. It was real fast too.
I knew of a Law Firm in Cleveland that was still using
VMS and WP still, 2 years ago.
>
>Steve
>
>
>On Sun, 14 Mar 1999 19:45:37 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jedi)
>wrote:
>
>>On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 02:32:19 GMT, Steve <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>Amen...A word that is mentioned quite infrequently in this group,
>>>productivity.
>>>
>>>
>>>It doesn't matter a hill of beans how technically superior your OS is
>>>if there are no applications for it that the general public want to
>>>use.
>>>
>>>Vi, And EMacs and ppp-on, ppp-off, and slrn and tin an trn and tetris
>>>and ispell and on and on and on don't cut it when you have a plethora
>>>of Windows applications that blow the doors off the Linux crap...
>>>Users are NOT interested in going back to the 1970's....
>>
>> Of course not. Word Perfect using secretaries might
>> actually be expected to actually produce again.
>>
>> For some jobs, 'going back to the 70s' is the right
>> thing to do. At least the machines were reliable then.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>On Mon, 15 Mar 1999 01:30:09 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ed Falis) wrote:
>>>
>>>><7chjmb$f6o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>>
>>>>Sorry about the empty prior reply.
>>>>
>>>>On 14 Mar 1999 19:20:41 -0500, Guess Who <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would never be so cruel as to throw a rank beginner to the mercies
>>>>> of the unix command line. But anyone who tries to do serious work
>>>>> with Windows or Mac is kidding himself.
>>>>
>>>>You must have a pretty strange idea of what serious work is. We field IDE's on
>Windows as well as various Unices for various kinds of applications including hard
>>>>real-time, multi-million line applications, and safety-critical applications. And
>I daresay our Windows hosted versions are more pleasant to use than the UNIX ones.
>>>>Personally, I've always found the UNIX "user" level environment to be a
>distraction from getting serious work done - and I've done some serious work on it
>since the
>>>>early 80's. I've also seen an awful lot of people who are UNIX-philes waste a lot
>of time dicking around with their GUI and other configuration settings instead of
>getting
>>>>their purported work done.
>>>>
>>>>I guess my definition of serious is concentrating on the job at hand. So, if I
>have to spend more time thinking about the environment in which I'm doing it because
>it
>>>>_intrusively_ offers a lot of configurable bells and whistles I'm not interested
>in, I resent it. It's not serious, just seriously distracting.
>>>>
>>>>Can't argue taste, right? But your last statement is just BS, raising your own
>preference to the level of absolute truth.
>>>>
>>>>- Ed
>>>
>
--
"I was not elected to watch my people suffer and die |||
while you discuss this a invasion in committe." / | \
In search of sane PPP docs? Try http://penguin.lvcm.com
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (doole)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: For all you Nicrosoft lovers
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:59:17 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> apparently said this:
>"Authorities" with a capital "A", eh?
Don't be reading too much from my typing skills.
>Who do you think these "Authorities"
>are, God? Why should the fact that someone is employed by one of those
>organizations that you label an "Authority" give him the right to read my
>private files?
Don't get me wrong. I CERTAINLY don't think "Authorities" are God. In
fact, in most cases, they seem to be kind of screwed up.
But I say it again, why would you care what they read - UNLESS of
course, you were committing a crime. No one wants to answer that
question directly, for some stupid reason.
You send loads of your private information to the IRS, and willingly.
Why the hell isn't anyone complaining about THAT?
Doesn't make sense.
------------------------------
From: Larry Robbins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: error trying to edit kernel
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:46:15 GMT
I'm trying to configure my kernel (2.0.36) to support my d-link
DFE-530TX. when i try to 'make config' I get the error:
'no rule to make target 'config'. Stop.'
does anyone know how to fix this problem? Anyone successfully setup a
d-link DFE-530TX card? any help would be appreciated.
------------------------------
From: Eric Peers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: STB Velocity 128 Video Card
Date: 19 Mar 1999 07:47:45 GMT
I ran the STB velocity 128 at 1280x1024 and 16bpp without any troubles.
I can toss you the XF86Config file if you like.
I used the standard redhat 5.1 installation of xf86 to accomplish it.
John wrote:
>
> Any good information on this video card. Couldn't find any compatibly
list
> from Red Hat, Caldera or Linux.org on this card.
>
> Thank
>
> John
>
>
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
** 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.hardware) 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-Hardware Digest
******************************
