Linux-Misc Digest #397, Volume #19 Wed, 10 Mar 99 09:13:31 EST
Contents:
version control - complicated diff usage (Sascha Spangenberg)
Re: Probably Dumb Newbie Linux/NT Question (**Nick Brown)
Re: More bad news for NT (Harry)
Dialup setting problem (Ah Ken)
accessing cdrom ("Peter Strong")
Dialup setting problem (Ah Ken)
Re: "/usr is busy" error message on shutdown (Michael Powe)
LVM for Linux (Ilya)
Re: Windows 98 and System Resources ("Todd Bandrowsky")
Re: Public license question (Stephan Schulz)
Re: Windows vs Unix was Re: TROLL/KOOK WARNING! (jik-)
Re: SuSE 6.0 feelings please. (jik-)
Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing? (Johan Kullstam)
Re: Public license question (Sam Holden)
Which program to use scsi-tape drive? ("Ray")
Re: # Linux- how to read dBase files?? # (Christopher Browne)
Re: so, how is gnome 1.0, guys? <troll> (Christopher Browne)
Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing? (Christopher Browne)
Re: Database for Linux (Christopher Browne)
Re: Which program to use scsi-tape drive? (Ralf Lange)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Sascha Spangenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.emacs.xemacs,ed.linux
Subject: version control - complicated diff usage
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 12:13:08 +0000
Hi there,
is s.o. out there who knows how to do the following....
I have a file called foo version 1.0
I edit foo v1.0 and save it as v1.1
I further edit v1.1 and save it as v1.2
Now I copy foo v1.0 to - say foo2 v1.0- edit this file and save it at
v1.1
At this stage I want to apply the same changes to foo2 v1.1 as I did in
foo from v1.1->v1.2
Assume that the parts where changes need to be made shall be
* identical in foo v1.1 and foo2 v1.1 BUT
* at different positions withing the files...
Is there a way of doing this with diff or so???
Any ideas???
Sascha.
PS: An example?
foo and foo2 v1.0
===============
...
line1
line2
line3
line4
...
foo v1.1
===============
...
line1
line2.1
line3
line4
....
foo v1.2
===============
...
line1
line2.1
line3.2
line4
...
foo2 v1.1
===============
...
line1
line2.1
line2a
line3
line4.1
line5
...
foo2 v1.2
===============
...
line1
line2.1
line2a
line3.2 <- changed "line3" to "line3.2" as in foo 1.1->1.2
line4.1
line5
...
------------------------------
From: **Nick Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Probably Dumb Newbie Linux/NT Question
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:24:30 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can get an NTFS driver - I have the Debian distrib version. It's an
installable module, NTFS.O.
It's read-only - read/write to NTFS in the absence of NT itself poses
all kinds of semantic problems, because NTFS writing is so tied up with
NT security IDs. www.sysinternals.com have NTFS for DOS read-only -
they claimed (last time I looked) to be working on a r/w version but not
much has happened for a while.
Only problem with the NTFS.O which I have is that it wants to load under
kernel 2.0.33. You can load it OK under 2.0.34 and 2.0.36 with "insmod
-f", but /etc/modules doesn't allow -f, so I load it with insmod -f in
/etc/mountall.sh. (Apologies if some or all of this is
Debian-specific.)
Euan B wrote:
>
> This has probably been posted 1000's of times before, so apologies to
> everyone :-).
>
> Can Linux read/write to a NTFS partion? If so how do I set it up to do so
> and do I need any other modules / patches to accomplish this.
>
> I have RH5.0 with Kernal 2.036 (I think).
>
> Sorry if I have wasted anyone / everyones time and thanks for any info !!
>
> --
> Euan B
> -------------------
> Disclaimer:
> Any views or opinions expressed in this message are all mine and
> not in any way expressed by GW - Honest
--
===============================================================
Nick Brown, Strasbourg, France (Nick(dot)Brown(at)coe(dot)fr)
Protect yourself against Word 95/97 viruses, free - check out
http://www.geocities.com/NapaValley/Vineyard/1446/atlas-t.html
===============================================================
------------------------------
From: Harry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: More bad news for NT
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 07:27:44 -0500
David Steuber wrote:
> Are you still on that old fashioned linear time?
Alas yes. There've been many occasions when the facility to go to a
parallel time line would be useful (deadline approaching, bump into
ex-girlfriend on first date with new one, etc), but I've yet to get
the hang of it.
Harry
------------------------------
From: Ah Ken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Dialup setting problem
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 19:16:48 +0800
Dear,
I'm the new Linux user. Does anyone can show me how to set the dialup in
X-Windows using CTInets?
Thanks,
Ah Ken
------------------------------
From: "Peter Strong" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: accessing cdrom
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 22:59:28 +1000
the first of many many q's as Im new to Linux, but how do you access the
cdrom, and other drives for that matter??
thankyou :)
------------------------------
From: Ah Ken <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Dialup setting problem
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 19:19:10 +0800
Dear,
I'm the new Linux user. Does anyone can show me how to set the dialup in
X-Win using CTInets?
Thanks,
Ah Ken.
------------------------------
From: Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "/usr is busy" error message on shutdown
Date: 10 Mar 1999 01:01:28 -0800
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
>>>>> "Gregory" == Gregory G Woodbury <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Gregory> Michael Powe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> shaped electrons
Gregory> to say:
>> I've started getting this message when I shutdown the system.
>> When going through the shutdown procedure, I see the message
>> "/usr is busy" when the filesystems are being unmounted. Then
>> when I come back into the system, I get "/dev/hdc3 not cleanly
>> unmounted, check forced" and then fsck runs. No problems are
>> detected/fixed.
>> Not sure what caused this. I very seldom reboot this system,
>> the last time would have been late January when I upgraded to
>> kernel 2.2.
>> Any ideas what might be causing it? How to fix it?
Gregory> My experience is that there is some process that is not
Gregory> properly responding to the signals that the shutdown
Gregory> process send to them. Generally I find that it is one of
Gregory> the system daemons or something in the /etc/rc.d tree.
Gregory> The solution I used was to edit the rc.sysinit(?)
Gregory> script (where the system is unmounting partitions) and
Gregory> adding a "mount -o remount,ro /usr" at the end of the
Gregory> sequence so that the fsck is avoided in subsequent boots.
Gregory> If the remount fails, then there is probably a corrupt
Gregory> process or kernel module, and more investigation is
Gregory> warranted.
Thanks for the info, I'll check this out.
mp
- --
Michael Powe Portland, Oregon USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.trollope.org
"Three hours a day will produce as much as a man ought to write."
-- Anthony Trollope
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: GnuPG v0.9.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Encrypted with Mailcrypt 3.5.1 and GNU Privacy Guard
iD8DBQE25jTm755rgEMD+T8RAtj+AJ97tZWNVPcZHlT2rXPAMJj6PtfWsQCeI364
bRirpd7FHoDpm+5I2gaikGA=
=lfnK
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
------------------------------
From: Ilya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: LVM for Linux
Date: 8 Mar 1999 04:41:43 GMT
One of the most exciting development for Linux, in my opinion.
http://linux.msede.com/lvm/
--
Ilya
------------------------------
Reply-To: "Todd Bandrowsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
From: "Todd Bandrowsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.advocacy,linux.redhat.misc,microsoft.public.win98.gen_discussion,microsoft.public.win98.performance,microsoft.public.windowsnt.misc
Subject: Re: Windows 98 and System Resources
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 23:18:38 -0500
Jorge Padron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:7bk51s$2mka$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
>The real issue to me, more that the amount of resources available right
>after re-booting Windows 98 which could be improved by not having that many
>processes running at system startup (run MSCONFIG from the Start/Run menu),
>is the fact that a typical machine running Windows 98 *will* undoubtedly
>lose resources with time and will eventually require a "re-boot" to regain
>resources.
That actually depends. Windows 95/98 can recover some resources if you kill
the leaky process, but Windows NT does it better. I, for example run a web
browser, Word and Excel, and Visual C++ and do development with it, and can
have uptimes in the range of weeks under even squeeky Windows 98, and the
only time I need to reboot is because I screwed up testing out full screen
mode on Direct X, or went to NT to play age of empires.
>
>After working with Windows 3.x,
A pig of resource management. No process resource protection, and only 64k
of them each.
>use, their machines' resources go down to unbelievable low numbers (i.e.
>Resources = 29%);
What apps?
>at that point, even if they close every running
>application and most uneeded tasks, their resources won't go back up to
even
>65 or 70%.
>to do with the percent of available resources -- in other words, Windows 98
>machines with only 32MB of RAM will leak resources and will not recover
from
>those memory leaks just the same as machines tha have 128, 256 or even more
>RAM.
True. Resources are silly things like file handles and, more importantly,
graphic objects like fonts, brushes and pens. Why unix tends more towards
stability is related to this. Read on.
>What's interesting is that NT 3.x and 4 machines also
>have short system-up cycles. On NT, I've noticed this happening more on
>havily used workstations -- on NT servers, memory resource levels seem to
be
>more stable than on NT Workstations.
I think this is an application you folks must be running, more than anything
else. There's a utility out there that can tell you what exactly what kind
of handles an application has open, a sort of ultra detailed per application
resource meter for applications.... Christ if I could remember the URL, but
I do recall that it is somewhere buried in
comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32.
>
>***** What I'd like to know at this point is whether operating systems such
>as UNIX or Linux suffer from this inability to self-recover from
>memory-leaking processes, tasks, applications, programs, threads or any
>executing process that allocates memory?
Unix and Linux processes seem to have three things going for them to make
them stabler.
1. They are smaller. The Unix way is to string together dozens of simple
processes, rather than put together a giant application. This gives the O/S
more opportunities to deal with greedy or buggy applications.
2. Under Unix, the GUI can be safely shutdown while the operating system
continues to run. I've noticed that the GUI under Unix is actually less
stable than the GUI under Windows, but under Windows, you really can't do
too much to kill the GUI, except for killing EXPLORER.EXE process from task
manager under Windows NT, which is not exactly the same thing - although it
is extremely helpful just the same.
3. They are text. All that interactivity in a GUI app means more
complications. Complications means bugs. It is easy to make a GUI app, but
it is difficult to get one that does not leak resources. If you don't have
lots of GUI apps, you won't be leaking GUI resources, so you will have a
bigger up time. besides, under Unix, if you get into trouble, then you can
simply kill the entire GUI.
>I have no professional experience
>with UNIX or Linux so I'd be very interested to know from UNIX and Linux
>professionals how is it that they are able to have the long system-up
cycles
>(sometimes months at a time without re-booting) they claim to have?
My NT Workstation has been up for about three months now. The biggest thing
is to remember that if it seems locked up, or confused, just kill
EXPLORER.EXE. Your entire desktop, taskbar, everything will go away, and,
after some hesitant spinning of the disk, come back, with no worse for the
wear.
>shaftone wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>>How long do we have to go before MS finds out that Win98 has a problem
>>handling the resources. I am having the same problem. Resouces run at
>>54% at the start. After that it's all but downhill. I can't open too
>>many windows anymore even with 64 RAM on a P200Mmx. I used to be able
>>to do it before in Win98. It's just at some point this damn OS began
>>acting up.
>>
>>This is a freaking bug and should be top priority for MS in the next
>>SP coming up.
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephan Schulz)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Public license question
Date: 10 Mar 1999 11:37:18 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Geoffrey KEATING <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephan Schulz) writes:
>
>...
>> Or, to be obvious, if I take the novel "Snow Crash" and distribute it
>> as a list of individual words in alphabetic order (non-copyrightable)
>> and offer a web-page which gives me a list of numbers that say which
>> word goes were, I _am_ violating copyright, even though the user is
>> the one that puts the novel together again.
>
>Because your list of numbers is a translation of the original novel.
I cannot say I did not see this argument coming. And you are right to
a certain degree. However, it is not quite as simple as that. Let's
assumue I use simple XOR encryption, and apply a perfect white noise
key to the novel. Both the key and the encrypted novel are now white
noise - I cannot get the novel or any non-random piece of it from
either the key or the encrypted novel. Moreover, I can use both to
encrypt other data which I am legaly allowed to distribute, thus both
of these bit strings have independed uses. Nevertheless, if I
distribute both, I am in effect distributing "Snow Crash", and am thus
in violation of copyright, even though it is perfectly legal to
distibute each individual component, and even though the user has to
perform a non-trivial operation ("linking") of the two parts to
actually get the novel.
>However, if you write a document called "Analysis of the use of the
>word "snow" in the novel _Snow Crash_", which refers to each page on
>which the word is used, you can distribute it without violating
>copyright---not just because it's probably fair use, but because it
>doesn't actually contain a significant part of the novel.
I am not certain about that - in fact, as far as I know this paste-on
piece would very likely be considered a derived work, even though you
wrote every word yourself. This is similar to writing a sequel to a
successful novel - as far as I know, you are violating the authors
copyright, even though you are not copying his words.
Stephan
========================== It can be done! =================================
Please email me as [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stephan Schulz)
============================================================================
------------------------------
From: jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: nz.comp,nz.politics
Subject: Re: Windows vs Unix was Re: TROLL/KOOK WARNING!
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 04:45:55 -0800
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGPfreeware 6.0.2i
^
what is this? ^
I haven't seen that version I don't think.
------------------------------
From: jik- <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: SuSE 6.0 feelings please.
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 04:44:30 -0800
Keith Davey wrote:
>
> I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has installed SuSE
> 6.0. What do you think of the product? How would you compare it to
> other
> distros like RedHat 5.2 and so forth.
I tried 5.3, liked it quite a bit. If it used the Slackware init setup
I might have kept it longer. I think it is better then RedHat, lots
better then Debian (leat in the install section), but still not as good
as Slackware. Pretty profesional distribution though....nice 2nd best.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing?
From: Johan Kullstam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 10 Mar 1999 06:36:41 -0500
Gianni Mariani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Johan Kullstam wrote:
>
> > Gianni Mariani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Johan Kullstam wrote:
> > >
> > > > John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > >
> > > > > Brian Moore writes:
> > > > > > (Again, much of this is due to their non-compete clause that they signed
> > > > > > when they sold Xenix off to SCO, so it's unlikely to change.)
> > > > >
> > > > > It'll change the moment they decide that buying out the agreement is a
> > > > > worthwhile investment.
> > > >
> > > > yes, but as far as i can tell, microsoft are idealogically committed
> > > > to destroying unix. i can see bill gates taking off his shoe and
> > > > pounding it on the rostrum....
> > > >
> >
> > > Microsoft doesn't even know how to spell Unix :(*) Who are you kidding :)(
> >
> > > Unix/Linux is alot of fun to use. But, until there is *lots* of cash
> > > in it, MS won't take it seriously.
> >
> > MS do take unix seriously.
>
> OK - how ?
they made NT. are you really insisting that MS completely ignores
unix? MS usually has a more paranoid response to even the most
instubstatial of threats, cf., the browser war.
> > MS are committed to `windows everywhere'.
> > that means, no other operating systems, e.g., unix. MS wouldn't even
> > have to say `windows everywhere' is there goal if there were *no*
> > competition.
>
> NO, Windows everywhere is the way they see they will make the most
> cash. Their committed to their shareholders, employees and customers.
> That seems to best translate to Windows unless you have a better idea.
and if i am using unix and not windows, that is a lost sale. MS
doesn't give a rat's ass about it's shareholders. MS wants to put
windows everywhere and control the computer market. share prices are
just along for the ride.
> > > How do you go to your shareholders (of a $400billion company) and
> > > tell them, BTW - we're dropping everything and going to Linux ? The
> > > only ideology MS has is capitalism.
you tell them to go screw since they are minority stake holders. :-0
> > why would they do that? every linux install is a rejection of
> > windows.
>
> Circular logic ...
how is this circular?
> > > When MS sees that it is able to make around $1billion/year in
> > > software sales on Linux, you will see them porting stuff. Be
> > > careful though, do you really want the "registry", "proc calls",
> > > "GDI", "Direct-X" on Linux ? Gee, MS would love it,
> >
> > this is going off on a strange tangent...
>
> Why ?
because it is so far fetched.
> > > you get to support irate Win98 come Linux customers over the
> > > comp.os.linux.misc newsgroup and they would have a field day
> > > shipping Office for Linux. Oh, and then they would be the evil MS
> > > because they support Linux and make a huge bunch of cash on Linux
> > > apps but don't support the OS.
> >
> > > Tell you what: Make a proposal to MS (other than MS get lost) on how
> > > you would make *lots* of cash selling Linux based products for MS.
> >
> > why? i really *do* want MS to *get* *lost*.
>
> There are currently 400 billion reasons why they won't get lost in a
> hurry.
that doesn't change my opinion. i really *do* want MS to *get*
*lost*. it doesn't mean they will, however.
> Live with it !
no, i will fight to use the tools which suit me.
--
J o h a n K u l l s t a m
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Don't Fear the Penguin!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sam Holden)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Public license question
Date: 10 Mar 1999 13:21:14 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Stephan Schulz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
>Geoffrey KEATING <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>However, if you write a document called "Analysis of the use of the
>>word "snow" in the novel _Snow Crash_", which refers to each page on
>>which the word is used, you can distribute it without violating
>>copyright---not just because it's probably fair use, but because it
>>doesn't actually contain a significant part of the novel.
>
>I am not certain about that - in fact, as far as I know this paste-on
>piece would very likely be considered a derived work, even though you
>wrote every word yourself. This is similar to writing a sequel to a
>successful novel - as far as I know, you are violating the authors
>copyright, even though you are not copying his words.
Are you arguing that all those 'guide to' books on English novels people
study in school are violating copyright? Are you saying that the vast
majority of book reviews are violating copyright.
Copyright allows me to refer to a copyrighted work. Otherwise it would be
reasonably difficult to write those essays...
--
Sam
Even if you aren't in doubt, consider the mental welfare of the person
who has to maintain the code after you, and who will probably put parens
in the wrong place. --Larry Wall
------------------------------
From: "Ray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Which program to use scsi-tape drive?
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:17:17 GMT
Which program to use scsi-tape drive? The program taper is, what i see, only
for Floppy-Streamer.
???
Regards
The Ray
Where i work http://www.ultrasonic.at
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: # Linux- how to read dBase files?? #
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:21:12 GMT
On Tue, 9 Mar 1999 01:24:47 -0000, Allen O'Neill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Anyone know of a ready built lib in say perl / pascal / C that allows one
>to easily read/write to dbase tables?
Various options; see <http://www.hex.net/~cbbrowne/rdbmsxbase.html>
--
Linux is obsolete
(Andrew Tanenbaum)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: so, how is gnome 1.0, guys? <troll>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:21:17 GMT
On Tue, 09 Mar 1999 15:45:56 GMT, steve mcadams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[Posted & mailed, snipped, quoted is ">"]
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne) wrote:
>>><sigh> Only 35meg. Well, moving right along...
>>
>>That's either much better or a little better or "pretty awful" depending
>>on whether you're running (respectively) a machine with either moderate,
>>much, or little memory.
>>
>>To be sure, these "environments" are going to have a certain degree of
>>RAM overhead.
>
>I have no problem with buffering but consider apps to be boneheaded if
>they insist on large fixed-size buffers. 35meg codesize is ridiculous
>for what it sounds like it offers, but it sounds like some of the
>35meg is large fixed-size buffers. Still ridiculous for the level of
>function we're talking about as I see it. For this level of function
>I'd expect maybe 2-4meg codesize and buffering based on available
>memory.
I've not checked the RAM consumption from GNOME proper, as opposed to E;
E is *definitely* huge.
I get the feeling that Netscape is, by itself, a worse application (from
memory consumption perspective) than all of GNOME put together.
>There must be a shitload of unused support code buried in it
>that's waiting for somebody to write apps that use it.
Certainly. There's an ORB that doesn't seem yet to be *heavily* used.
>>GNOME comes with several additional text editors, much as KDE adds some.
>>I really don't understand why...
>
>Probably seen as an improvement, I wouldn't know without trying them.
>I'm still trying to find the time to spend a weekend with emacs, until
>then I use Midnight Commander's built-in editor which is the most
>comfortable given the set of habits my day-job enforces (working with
>NT).
The way I look at it is that many of the applications are "first turn
around the track," as well as being "first attempts at GTk/GNOME apps."
The world doesn't need Yet Another Xterm Clone (GNOME Terminal comes to
mind...) all that badly, but if someone starts their "apprenticeship" by
writing one, this may give them the understanding required to proceed on
to something more novel and more useful.
>>Right now it's a bunch of moderately-pretty applications, and the
>>promise of more to come.
>
>Cool, sounds like I should stay tuned for a couple of turns around the
>evolutionary track.
Assuming that the "more novel and more useful" things come along, and
that GNOME is indeed a "viable evolutionary track," then that's likely.
--
Linux is obsolete
(Andrew Tanenbaum)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: Can Linux use 36-bit Xeon addressing?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:21:20 GMT
On Tue, 09 Mar 1999 17:51:40 GMT, Gianni Mariani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>The only ideology MS has is capitalism.
Can you elaborate on how earnings accruing from ownership of capital
explains Microsoft's actions?
It seems rather more common that the use of the term "capitalism" is
used to suggest that someone purported to be a "capitalist" is somehow
"bad" without actually providing any connection between their badness
and the nature of capitalism.
Alternatively, describing something as "good" because of "capitalism"
seems to have lot more to do with ideology than it does with any of the
properties of a capitalist system.
(And don't get me started about "democracy." The use of *that* word as
either boost or bane seems almost entirely devoid of relationship to the
properties of democracy...)
>When MS sees that it is able to make around $1billion/year in software
>sales on Linux, you will see them porting stuff.
Ah. My guess is that your ideology involves the notion that there is
some identity between "capitalism" and "greed." There may indeed be an
association, but they had greed for thousands of years before anyone
started identifying the notion of capitalism...
--
Linux is obsolete
(Andrew Tanenbaum)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Subject: Re: Database for Linux
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:21:23 GMT
On 08 Mar 1999 18:24:36 -0500, David Steuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Klaus Bernpaintner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>-> I am thinking of developing a small application that requires some
>-> databasing. Initially this will be a small app, intended to run
>-> locally. Would Postgre be suitable for this, or does it consume to much
>-> resources? Are there any tools for using filebased databases (a la
>-> dBase) on Linux? Would that be more suitable?
>->
>-> Ideas, experiences, anyone?
>
>Just a useless comment, I'm afraid. I have a nit to pick with
>'consume to much resources' and it is not the grammar.
>
>I have both MySQL and PostgreSQL installed, because I haven't decided
>which one to use for an application that will need a database. I need
>a database and I want/need to learn SQL. I will probably use Postgre,
>but who knows?
>
>The resource usage is secondary to performance. I need to be able to
>fetch, insert, and update records quickly. I am also running hardware
>from the latter part of the decade. It would take some seriously piss
>poor software to not be up to snuff. Hmm. I hope you know what I
>mean.
>
>You will only be consuming too many resources if you don't have enough
>to do the task. What you need really depends on the application.
>What's available is what you've got. In any case, the requirements of
>the application will determin how much iron you need to throw at it.
The author of gtk_pizza (SteveOC; see <http://www.iweb.net.au/~steveoc>)
did a port of it to mySQL, after having written it originally to use
PostgreSQL.
He did some performance testing, and found (this from postings on the
Linux ERP mailing list) that:
- "mySQL is about 10% quicker when doing big straight lookups. (select
15000 records from 1 table showing all orders, format the output nice
and pretty, and load them into a list box)"
- "Doing slightly complex things causes mySQL to bog down - select
distinct item_code from order_details (no index on item code). Postgres
crunches 80000 records in 8 seconds flat, mySQL does the same query in
34 seconds with lots of disk munching."
- "Running the sales report (see
http://www.iweb.net.au/~steveoc/gtk_pizza.html) which needs to do lots
of data munching, postgres gets the same job done in about half the time
that mySQL takes."
In terms of reliability, mySQL doesn't seem to be nearly as
sophisticated in its handling of failures as PostgreSQL.
His conclusion:
"the much vaunted 'performance' of mySQL over postgres is a figment of
someone's beta testing. In a real life environment, I cannot see that
mySQL is significantly faster."
--
Linux is obsolete
(Andrew Tanenbaum)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: Ralf Lange <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.networking
Subject: Re: Which program to use scsi-tape drive?
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 14:22:37 +0100
tar,dump,restore,dd
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
