Linux-Misc Digest #632, Volume #18 Fri, 15 Jan 99 22:13:12 EST
Contents:
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (Alan Boyd)
Re: ios virtual table: where is it defined? (root)
Re: Linux: Fight for survival or on victory march? ("Carl S. Isgro")
Re: Getting an ICQ Client Under Linux (Darren Greer)
AfterStep 1.6.6 RPM Help ("Brian St. Pierre")
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (Darin Johnson)
Debian 1.3 Includes Stupid "man" ??! (Tetchman)
Re: Linux: Fight for survival or on victory march? (Kryz Caputa)
Re: question: learning SQL on Linux (David M. Cook)
Getting an ICQ Client Under Linux ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Kernel Build: System too big. (Barry Hawkins)
Re: Help needed: corrupt mbr (Duncan Clarke)
Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class. (Darin Johnson)
Re: redifining alt-ctrl-del keys (Jim Hill)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Alan Boyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class.
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 20:12:41 -0600
John Morris wrote:
>
> >Some of them were, yes. Concurrent CP/M, PC-MOS and Xenix were
> >all multitasking/multiuser. DR-DOS was very similar to MS-DOS
> >but with a lot of usability enhancements
>
> What's intriguing is what they could do with such
> MINIMAL hardware back then!!
If you like that, you'll love this. I used to work for a distributor of
Romenco (sp?), which was a restaurant system that was 8086 based. The
home grown OS could run three programs at a time. In our office we
typically ran the restaurant management system, the BASIC interrupter
and CP/M-86 at the same time. This was on a machine with 128K of
memory.
We also ran hotel's on a Four/Phase machine with 72K or 96K of memory.
I'm talking about the front desk, house keeping, reservations,
restrauants and bars, phone operator, the whole works. An identical
machine that was the fall back computer ran the back office with A/P,
A/R, G/L, night audit, etc.
Those were the days.
--
"I don't believe in anti-anything. A man has to have a
program; you have to be *for* something, otherwise you
will never get anywhere." -- Harry S Truman
------------------------------
From: root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: ios virtual table: where is it defined?
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 20:09:10 -0500
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >I am sure this is a straight forward question with a simple answer. I am
> >building KDE 1.0 with gcc-2.8.1 on Slackware. In the kdebase/kdehelp submodule
> >during the linking stage I get the error message "undefined reference to 'ios
> >virtual table', 'istream::ios virtual table', and 'ifstream::ios virtual
> >table'. In what library are these defined so that I can link to them?
> ><fstream.h> and <iostream.h> are in the g++-include directory. What am I
> >missing? Thanks.
>
> You probably need to add -lstdc++ to you link command.
>
I tried adding this but I get the same error messages. I also am using
libstdc++.so.2.8.1.1. Any other suggestions? Thanks.
------------------------------
From: "Carl S. Isgro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux: Fight for survival or on victory march?
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 20:28:37 -0500
Brian Newman wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> says...
> >
> >I can't believe we're forgetting one of the greatest Intel operating systems of
> >all time:
> >
> >TRSDOS!!!!!
>
> The TRS-80 (original, at least, and Type III, dunno about the Type II) was based
> on the Zilog Z-80 CPU. The TRS-80 CoCo (Color Computer) was based on the
> Motorola 65C02, an updated 6502.
>
> I was there, damnit! :)
>
> --------------------
> Shade and sweet water,
> Brian -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.aracnet.com/~bnewman
> "A small bullet, a piece of glass /
> And your heart just grows around it" -- Laurie Anderson, "Poison"
Then you should have known that the CoCo was based on the Motorola 6809e
processor which also supported OS9 a multitasking operating system for
the 68xxx series of processors.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Darren Greer)
Subject: Re: Getting an ICQ Client Under Linux
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 02:15:41 GMT
Use licq......you should be able to find an RPM on the redhat ftp
site. It will install very painlessly (is that a word?).
DrGreer
On Sat, 16 Jan 1999 01:49:32 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-->I'm attempting (and sort of succeeding) to get an ICQ client working under
-->RedHat 5.1
-->
-->I've attempted to install kxicq, but when I try to run it I get the following
-->error:
-->ERROR in MSG file...
-->Segmentation fault (core dumped)
-->
-->Any clues?
-->
-->2) I've also installed kicq, and it's working, but there are no icons. Any
-->clue what I need to do to make them appear?
-->
-->-Jordan Reed
-->[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-->
-->-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
-->http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: "Brian St. Pierre" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: AfterStep 1.6.6 RPM Help
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 19:10:29 -0600
i just updated AfterStep 1.5b4 to 1.6.6 on my RedHat 5.2 system...
Before i could load AfterStep from the start menu of fvwm95 but since
installing teh new AfterStep, i no longer have AfterStep as an option to
switch to??? Can anyone help?
------------------------------
From: Darin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class.
Date: 15 Jan 1999 18:18:13 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro) writes:
> DEC was
> *extremely* not amused by existance of BSD, since they considered VAXen as
> their main product (in -11 times it was -10).
DEC was actually openly hostile towards UNIX. DEC was essentially
anti-UNIX, which is so ironic considering their about face later on.
Service techs would refuse to service the hardware if they found UNIX
on it, as they would say it was a software problem (it was a somewhat
common practice to reload VMS before calling the techs). Ken Olsen,
founder and long-time CEO referred to UNIX as "snake oil" (and this
was even after Ultrix was released).
Before UNIX, DEC was the David that helped bring down the Goliath of
IBM. They were the good guys that supplied cheap minis so that
everyday departments and programmers could escape the oppression of
IBM dominated IS departments. But after UNIX, DEC turned out to look
just like IBM used to look - they used FUD, they became the champion
of proprietary solutions, and became the bulwark of many IS
departments as well.
The successor to DEC then was joint between IBM/Microsoft as well as
Sun; both groups of which again provided freedom from IS control, in
the form of either usable personal computers that one can set up and
use without getting IS involved, or affordable workstations and
departmental UNIX boxes. Then, ironically, the PC's have become under
the control of IS departments, Microsoft is the bad guy promoting
proprietary solutions, and the story repeats. Don't know if the story
will repeat with Sun, because UNIX never got too controlled by IS, and
Sun always kept open standards and interoperability as a higher
priority than proprietary solutions.
--
Darin Johnson
"Look here. There's a crop circle in my ficus!" -- The Tick
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tetchman)
Subject: Debian 1.3 Includes Stupid "man" ??!
Date: 16 Jan 1999 02:18:36 GMT
I have Debian 1.3 installed on i386, and have been wondering why the supplied
"man" program is so stupid as to refuse to go back one screen using "b" (it
just beeps at me).
We have both Slackware (very old version) and Redhat 4.2 installed at work, and
both of them have a "man" which does what I want.
Anyway, my Debian "man" says its version is
"man, version 2.3.10, db 2.3.1, July 12th, 1995 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])"
so does anyone know whether this is the intended version or not ?
PS: I can do "man foo >xxx.txt", and then "more xxx.txt", and get what I want,
so it can't be a problem with my "more" program. And I always assumed that
"man" just calls "more" ...
PPS: I know Debian is at V2.0 now (soon to be 2.2 ?); does that fix it ?
TIA,
Tetch
------------------------------
From: Kryz Caputa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Linux: Fight for survival or on victory march?
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 1999 17:32:13 -0800
Brian Newman wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> says...
> >
> >I can't believe we're forgetting one of the greatest Intel operating systems of
> >all time:
> >
> >TRSDOS!!!!!
>
> The TRS-80 (original, at least, and Type III, dunno about the Type II) was based
> on the Zilog Z-80 CPU. The TRS-80 CoCo (Color Computer) was based on the
> Motorola 65C02, an updated 6502.
Wrong! It was Motorola 6809, much more advanced cpu than 6502. There
even was a unix-like (sort of) operating system for it called OS-9. I
guess you had to buy an external floppy drive for the CoCo in order to
use it.
Unless you mean TRS-80 Micro Color Computer with chicklet keys and the
Motorola 68C03 CPU which was a slightly updated Motorola 6800.
--
Kryz Caputa
Dpt of Electrical and Computer Engineering
University of Victoria, British Columbia
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (David M. Cook)
Subject: Re: question: learning SQL on Linux
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 02:45:00 GMT
On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 11:47:54 -0800, Doug Sanderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>at the thought of being my own database administrator. What would you
>suggest?
I wouldn't worry about that. Postgresql is pretty easy if you install it
from RPMs, which you can get at
ftp://ftp.lame.org/mirrors/redhat-contrib/libc5/i386
among other places. After you install it log in as root and run the
following line:
su - postgres -c 'createuser yourusername'
where yourusername is your actual username. This will allow you to create
databases without being root.
As for learning SQL, I recommend _The Practical SQL Handbook_. I found _The
Linux Database_ somewhat disappointing.
Dave Cook
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Getting an ICQ Client Under Linux
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 1999 01:49:32 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm attempting (and sort of succeeding) to get an ICQ client working under
RedHat 5.1
I've attempted to install kxicq, but when I try to run it I get the following
error:
ERROR in MSG file...
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
Any clues?
2) I've also installed kicq, and it's working, but there are no icons. Any
clue what I need to do to make them appear?
-Jordan Reed
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
============= Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ============
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
------------------------------
From: Barry Hawkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Kernel Build: System too big.
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 21:39:29 -0500
==============EF74ACE387559C6B38865651
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Roger Rouse wrote:
>
> I just installed Linux 2.0.0. I want a custom kernel. However, make
> zImage fails in
> the last step when it tries to create the compressed kernel image. It
> just says 'System
> too big.' and dies. Here's some relevant info:
>
> The generic kernel boots but doesn't understand my ethernet card or
> soundcard. Also
> it doesn't have enough pty's to start an xterm! It's the slackware
> distribution on a
> Pentium Upgrade (use to be a 486). Linux 1.3.?? worked just fine.
> Here's what I did:
> make config; make dep; make zImage.
>
> Here are my questions:
I am not an expert, but I can answer some of your questions
>
>
> Why aren't there enough pty's to start an xterm?
> What's it mean the system's too big?
a zImage file can only be so large and the newer kernels are too large
for you to use that
>
> If I follow the instructions how could the 'system' be too big?
> How do I get around this problem?
You should be able to get around the problem by using make bzImage
instaed. It supports larger compressed files. If you want to create a
boot disk, use make bzdisk.
>
> Is it hardware related?
No.
>
>
> - Roger
>
> +------------------------------------------------------------+
> |Roger B. Rouse + # # # . |
> | # . + |
> |Arizona State University # + + # |
> |Dept. Physics & Astronomy + + + # + |
> |Tempe, Az, 85287-1504 + + # |
> | . . @ . . |
> |[EMAIL PROTECTED] # + + |
> | + # + + + |
> | # + + . |
> | + . # |
> | . # + # . Rouse|
> +------------------------------------------------------------+
>
==============EF74ACE387559C6B38865651
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML>
Roger Rouse wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<BR>I just installed Linux 2.0.0. I want a custom kernel.
However, make zImage fails in
<BR>the last step when it tries to create the compressed kernel image.
It just says 'System
<BR>too big.' and dies. Here's some relevant info:
<P>The generic kernel boots but doesn't understand my ethernet card or
soundcard. Also
<BR>it doesn't have enough pty's to start an xterm! It's the slackware
distribution on a
<BR>Pentium Upgrade (use to be a 486). Linux 1.3.?? worked just fine.
Here's what I did:
<BR>make config; make dep; make zImage.
<P>Here are my questions:</BLOCKQUOTE>
I am not an expert, but I can answer some of your questions
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<P>Why aren't there enough pty's to start an xterm?
<BR>What's it mean the system's too big?</BLOCKQUOTE>
a zImage file can only be so large and the newer kernels are too large
for you to use that
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<BR>If I follow the instructions how could the 'system' be too big?
<BR>How do I get around this problem?</BLOCKQUOTE>
You should be able to get around the problem by using make bzImage instaed.
It supports larger compressed files. If you want to create a boot disk,
use make bzdisk.
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<BR>Is it hardware related?</BLOCKQUOTE>
No.
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE>
<P> - Roger
<P><TT>+------------------------------------------------------------+</TT>
<BR><TT>|Roger B.
Rouse
+ # # #
+.
|</TT>
<BR><TT>|
# .
+
|</TT>
<BR><TT>|Arizona State University
# + +
#
|</TT>
<BR><TT>|Dept. Physics &
Astronomy
+ + + #
++
|</TT>
<BR><TT>|Tempe, Az,
85287-1504
+ +
+#
|</TT>
<BR><TT>|
. . @ .
.
|</TT>
<BR><TT>|[EMAIL PROTECTED]
# +
+
|</TT>
<BR><TT>|
+ # + +
++
|</TT>
<BR><TT>|
# + +
.
|</TT>
<BR><TT>|
+ .
+#
|</TT>
<BR><TT>|
. # + # . Rouse|</TT>
<BR><TT>+------------------------------------------------------------+</TT>
<BR> </BLOCKQUOTE>
</HTML>
==============EF74ACE387559C6B38865651==
------------------------------
From: Duncan Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: uk.comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Help needed: corrupt mbr
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 21:44:26 +0000
Ronald Duncan wrote:
>
> from a dos boot floppy say: fdisk /mbr
> This will allow you to boot the ms operating system from the hdd.
Is there any reason this functionality has not been included in the
Linux versions of fdisk? I believe there are ways of doing this with
dd, but it looked a bit difficult and dangerous.
--
Duncan Clarke
--
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: http://www.fuzzyhead.freeserve.co.uk
------------------------------
From: Darin Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.linux,alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Linux is not even in Windows 9X's class.
Date: 15 Jan 1999 17:36:54 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jeremy Crabtree) writes:
> >OK, first off, DOS was put onto a very very small machine. Most PC's
> >back then were 8-bit computers with a max of 64K RAM. You do not put
> >something like Linux on that, period.
>
> Sure ya do...haven't you seen the Unix for the C64? It even has a web server.
Um, it's quite debateable if you could call that "something like
Linux". It's extremely stripped down. You do have processes and
pipes, which is an advantage over DOS, but there's no memory
protection, no virtual memory, you can't prevent apps from bypassing
the OS, etc. And educated guesses tell me that you call system
routines by just jumping to the routine's address, that there is no
concept of a user, that there's a hardcoded stack size (in the
executable or else it's global). It may well be advanced for an 8-bit
OS though, but that's not saying it's "something like Linux".
--
Darin Johnson
Where am I? In the village... What do you want? Information...
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Hill)
Subject: Re: redifining alt-ctrl-del keys
Date: 15 Jan 1999 01:28:16 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Filip Hosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On my portable I would like to define next to my alt-ctrl-del key
>another combination (say alt-ctrl-end) to "halt" the pc.(halt also shuts
>of the machine power)
>
>Any solutions?
man 5 keytables
man 1 loadkeys
man 1 showkey
Jim
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.swcp.com/~jimhill/
"Visualize world peace...good.
Now wake up and smell the coffee."
------------------------------
** 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.misc) 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-Misc Digest
******************************
