Linux-Misc Digest #975, Volume #20 Fri, 9 Jul 99 03:13:10 EDT
Contents:
Re: suse, RH...? (Cameron L. Spitzer)
Ice & the ANGEL Enlightenment-theme... ("Jozef Molnár")
Re: computer literacy (was 'Linux viruses' or something) ("Binesh Bannerjee")
Re: Where is $PATH set in RH 6.0? ("Prasanth Kumar")
Re: Documentation issues. ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Netscape and CGI (Cameron L. Spitzer)
Re: ! (Equinox)
X Windows (Chaotic Thought)
Re: BSD Process Accounting question (Paul Colquhoun)
Re: running xconfig (Howard Mann)
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (Jim Richardson)
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (Jim Richardson)
Debian: NTP Time to RTC ? (Eric Wick)
running seti@home ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Where is $PATH set in RH 6.0? (Bruce Fletcher)
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (Robert Komar)
The price of honesty (was Re: G'bye, comp.os.linux.*) (Ian Smith)
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (Ian Smith)
Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark? (Ian Smith)
Re: Pronouncing "Linux" - your vote! ('Wulff)
kde log in ("John E. Hagensieker")
Re: Handling Time on Linux (brian moore)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cameron L. Spitzer)
Subject: Re: suse, RH...?
Date: 9 Jul 1999 05:04:39 GMT
In article <7m3tao$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Daniel Forester wrote:
>Hi, all... Looking for some recommendations on Suse vs. Redhat, or any
>others (Caldera, Debian...). Pretty sure I'm not quite ready for Slack,
>but ya know. ;-) I'm relatively new to linux, but no dummie. I did
>manage to (it looks like for now) totally screw my Redhat partition;
>haven't dug into it much yet, but I was thinking of just formatting it and
The first time I installed Debian, it filled up root and kept on
going. I got the most braindamaged installation you ever saw. It booted
and ran, but nothing worked the way it was supposed to.
No Linux distribution's installation is as bulletproof as the proprietary OSes, yet.
I've got four Debian boxes now; it's my favorite distribution.
Tried Red Hat 4.x (SPARC) and 5.1 (Intel) last year and I was so
underwhelmed I haven't been back.
If you must have RPM, try SuSE 6.1, it's quite nice.
>putting on another distro. ;-) Hence, I'm looking for recommendations.
>Any? Please respond via e-mail, if ya don't mind; I don't always get to
>this group that often.
That's rude. Visit news.announce.newusers.
Cameron
------------------------------
From: "Jozef Molnár" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Ice & the ANGEL Enlightenment-theme...
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 06:45:27 +0200
Hi There,
Ice, are you there? Or does anybody know Ice and his ANGEL
Enlightenment-theme?
I have seen a screenshot of this theme just for one day on e.themes.org
and I vould like
to have it. Unfortunately the links from that theme did not work for me,
so please anybody
answer, if you have some information on it!!!
Thank you
Jozef >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: "Binesh Bannerjee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: computer literacy (was 'Linux viruses' or something)
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 04:40:11 GMT
Robert McConnell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: Stephen,
: A computer is a far more complicated device than an automobile. Your
: auto does exactly one task - it moves from one place to another. A
: computer is capable of doing hundreds of different tasks, all
: depending on the software it runs. Each software program may be
: capable of hundreds of functions, while an auto only has a few dozen.
: Each software program may have a unique user interface, while even
: comparing all brands of autos there are really only two variations of
: one interface - standard and automatic. Individual controls may be
: slightly different, but all autos have the same basic controls. Not so
: with a computer. There are literally hundreds of different controls
: available, and probably that many more that haven't been thought of
: yet.
But, I think that's the point... There are hundreds of ways to make
a brake, yet people make them the same way, and so one does not _have_
to be "automobile" literate to use a car. Ditto for steering wheel,
and to a large extent even the internals of the car itself... To say
well, it does exactly "one" task, kinda oversimplifies the issue,
probably stemming from the fact that you don't understand the hundreds
of functions that may be going on in your car.
I think it's something that "we" (collective we, meaning computer people)
have perpetuated, primarily because it's kind of in our interest to do
so. Everywhere I go, when I tell them I'm a programmer, people
sheepishly admit to me (with an embarassed look) that they're computer
illiterate. Nobody walks around saying they're refrigerator illiterate
or microwave illiterate or stereo illiterate. Computers should be the
same way. And, in point of fact, they are nowhere NEAR as reliable
as any of those above products, no matter how much we talk about
our uptimes etc. I can forget about my microwave, and never even
think about it, and it works. I never even TALK about the uptime
of my stereo system. There isn't even a concept of "oh, geez, I had
to reboot my refridgerator again". The fact that these are even
accepted concepts among us programmers is telling.
: It only takes a few hours to learn how to use an auto, although it
: does take some practice to learn to use it safely and without having
: to focus on the hardware instead of the path you are guiding it along.
: But it can take months of study to learn how to use even a limited set
: of computer applications in a way that they become tools to apply to
: tasks instead of tasks in themselves.
What utter bullshit.
You say it only takes a few hours to learn how to use an auto,
but the extent to which you talk about "learning to use an auto"
is precisely the amount to which the average computer user wants
to learn about their computer. I think it only takes a few hours
to learn how to use the windows interface, learn to use a browser,
email and a wordprocessor. I'm _not_ pulling this out of my ass,
my parents whom I've just set up with a computer, had _never_
used a computer before, and now are just fine, after I simply
showed them how to use them. Practice is required, just as it's
required with a car.
The real comparison here would be as _us_ being the mechanics
and the users being the drivers. But, you say the drivers don't
need to know that much, but computer users should be the equivalent
of mechanics. You're using different standards for cars and computers.
: As a result, most "users" are actually only following a set of rote
: instructions prepared by someone who understands what the tool is
: doing. These basic "users" are exactly like the data entry clerks they
: were supposed to replace, until they take the time to understand what
: they are doing and how the computer is actually being used. Only those
: few that make a real effort to expand their horizons will move beyond
: the point of being appliance users, or data entry clerks.
Yes, EXACTLY like drivers. Most of them, (myself included) know
NOTHING at all about the difference between a carburetor(sp?) and
a radiator, just as I wouldn't expect that most users would know
the difference between a buffer overflow (or for that matter, what
a buffer is even) and a trojan horse.
And, why MUST everyone be forced to "move beyond being appliance users"??
How many scientists do you think use computers but never move beyond
say "Mathematica" or "Matlab" etc? They're "data entry clerks?" This
is part of the typical "I'm a programmer/Linux user, and I'm hot shit"
syndrome... Guess what, it's a big world, and each of us chooses what
we want to specialize in. Some people fill up their grey matter with
information on how to write device drivers. Others fill it up with
information about how best to reconcile quantum mechanics with relativity.
Others fill it up with how exactly one goes about squeezing out the
last few horses out of an old Corvette engine. Suggesting that everyone
who in the course of whatever has to USE a computer and doesn't
bother taking the time to learn about underlying details is small,
petty and indicates that you obviously overestimate the extent
of your own knowledge. Would you say that because Stephen Hawking
chooses not to spend his time figuring out how his machine works,
and instead USES his machine to communicate how the universe works,
he is therefore a "data entry clerk"??
Binesh Bannerjee
P.S. I have _no_ idea about whether or not Stephen Hawking really
DOES know about the internals of PC's or not... But it still
is irrelevant to my point...
: Bob McConnell
: N2SPP
: On Thu, 08 Jul 1999 17:02:00 -0400, Stephen Thomas
: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
:>> And because of M$oft's 'easy
:>> point-and-click' GUI, most of the people using these systems tend to
:>> NOT be computer literate and in fact M$oft's 'easy point-and-click' GUI
:>> discourages true computer literacy, which just makes things even
:>> easier for the crackers to spread these worms.
:>
:>I am not 'auto literate' but I use my car effectively and safely every day. Why
:>does anyone have to be 'computer literate' to effectively and safely use a
:>computer? Why can't it be so intuitive that a user just sits down and everything
:>functions obviously? It's just a tool like a phone or a microwave. Don't get me
:>wrong, I think the MS approach in general sucks, but your computer literacy
:>argument is not one well taken.
:>
:>Stephen Thomas
:>
------------------------------
From: "Prasanth Kumar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where is $PATH set in RH 6.0?
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 05:20:41 GMT
Bruce Fletcher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Ok, so thanks to everyone's help so far, we have identified several
> possible PATH sources including
>
> /bin/login (/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin)
> /etc/profile ($PATH:/usr/X11R6/bin)
> /etc/bashrc (nothing in my case)
> $HOME/.bash_profile ($PATH:$HOME/Python-1.5.2:$HOME/bin)
> $HOME/.bashrc (nothing in my case)
>
> Unfortunately, no simple combination of the contents of these can add up
> to my PATH:
>
>
/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/bruce/Pytho
>
n-1.5.2:/home/bruce/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/bruce/Python-1.5.2:/home/bruce/
bin
>
> So just where does this path all come from? I have no idea where the
> first bit comes from:
>
> /usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/bin
Some of it is compiled into the Bash binary. If you look at the SRPM for
bash you will see this.
>
> but it looks like /etc/profile and $HOME/.bash_profile are each executed
> twice after that. Why would that be?
>
> Puzzled,
> - Bruce
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Documentation issues.
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.unix.bsd.misc
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 05:46:50 GMT
Volker Hetzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: What about some new tag called <autoparagraph>?
: It would contain paragraphs separated by empty lines.
: Then you could use a simple preprocessing tool to reformat it.
Good idea!
The thing that impressed me most when I first tried troff
is that you could run an unformatted text file on it and
get mostly nice looking results.
I tried using Docbook for an O'Reilly project (Tcl/Tk Tools)
and gave up -- I told them if they insisted on it, I wouldn't
be able to give them a manuscript.
I think their tools have changed, but I'm still not very
keen on overly verbose markup.
Mark.
--
Mark Harrison "Open the floppy disk door, Hal."
AsiaInfo Computer Networks http://usai.asiainfo.com:8080/
Beijing, China / Santa Clara, CA [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Cameron L. Spitzer)
Crossposted-To: netscape.public.mozilla.unix
Subject: Re: Netscape and CGI
Date: 9 Jul 1999 04:50:49 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, scable wrote:
>Does anyone know what I need to do to get CGI
>scripts to work w/ Netscape on Red Hat 6.0?
Common Gateway Interface programs are launched by the Web server.
Do
ps ax | egrep 'httpd|apache'
If there is a little flock of daemons running there,
Red Hat has installed a Web server for you, otherwise
install Apache and make sure the Apache module mod_cgi is available
and enabled with the correct Handler directive. Then make sure the script is
in a ScriptAlias directory, or has a filename suffix (such as .cgi)
that's recognized as a script.
As free software goes, Apache is really well documented. Look at "Server
Documentation" at your nearest mirror of www.apache.org.
If you're serious about learning your way around this stuff,
it would be a good experience to install and configure Apache
from source instead of Red Hat's .rpm file.
>When my browser goes to one of my scripts, it
>just prints the entire text of the script file.
That will happen with file:/var/www/cgi-bin/yourscript no matter what.
Try http://127.0.0.1/cgi-bin/yourscript and see if Red Hat has set it
up for you already.
Cameron
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Equinox)
Subject: Re: !
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 04:21:22 GMT
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999 23:29:42 -0400, "H. Michael Smith, Jr."
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Gergo Barany wrote in message ...
>>In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Patric Mahoney wrote:
>>>!
>>
>>?
>
>#!*
$#!+
--Russell
===================================================
email (spam-disabled):
lord *underscore* equinox *at* mindspring *dot* com
------------------------------
From: Chaotic Thought <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: X Windows
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 04:59:38 GMT
Using XFree86, whenever I switch to a lower resolution via the
Ctrl-Alt-(-) key combo -- My screen scrolls whenever the mouse hits the
borders of the screen.
Is there any way to disable this?
Also, is there any way besides Ctrl-Alt-(+/-) to change resolutions in
XFree86 (e.g. by running a pgm)..?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Colquhoun)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: BSD Process Accounting question
Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 04:40:03 GMT
On Thu, 8 Jul 1999 19:41:43 +0800, Peter Caffin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
|[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
|> Hi,
|> I have a cgi (correo.de) that executes 119 real time seconds but spends
|> 51.92 cpu seconds. What I can not understand is, why sendmail spends
|> almost the same amount of real seconds but much less cpu seconds. What
|> is the big difference between "cp" and "re" ?
|
|> 242 671.68re 0.52cp httpd*
|> 2049 119.07re 51.92cp correo.de
|> 842 108.00re 0.69cp sendmail*
|
|Because Linux is a multi-tasking operating system, it shares the CPU with
|a number of other concurrent tasks. The "real time" refers to how long it
|took for the operation to finish; the "CPU time" refers to how long it
|would have taken to do if it had had full control of the CPU.
|
|If you want to give a process a higher priority (so it uses more CPU at
|the expense of other processes), investigate the `nice` utility with
|`man nice`.
There is also the issue of processes/programs having to wait for
outside events.
Sendmail in particular needs to wait for information to come
back from the mail server at the other end of the network link.
Time spent waiting like this counts as part of "real time", of course
but does not count as "CPU time" because no processing is happening.
CGI scripts that generate HTML content that needs to be sent to
a remote browser also experience this sort of wait.
Time spent waiting for data to be read from/written to a disk is
treated the same way.
--
Reverend Paul Colquhoun, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Universal Life Church http://andor.dropbear.id.au/~paulcol
-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-=*=-
xenaphobia: The fear of being beaten to a pulp by
a leather-clad, New Zealand woman.
------------------------------
From: Howard Mann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: running xconfig
Date: 9 Jul 1999 04:48:28 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Joseph S. White" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Hi All,
>
> How do you run the 'make xconfig' program, for re-compiling
> the kernel. The Kernel How To states you must have TK
> installed which I do. Anything else needed to run this
> program?
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Joe
Nope. Try typing, as root, "make xconfig" while you are in
the /usr/src/linux- <kernel version> directory.
Cheers,
--
Howard Mann
http://www.newbielinux.com
(a LINUX website for newbies)
Smart Linuxers search at: http://www.deja.com/home_ps.shtml
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,omp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark?
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 20:25:35 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 07 Jul 1999 17:05:23 GMT,
Anthony Ord, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>On 06 Jul 1999 12:33:53 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul
>D. Smith) wrote:
>
><snip>
>>Maybe you guys should let go of your knee-jerk prejudices WRT the
>>intelligence and attitudes of U.S. posters, and try to think more
>>carefully about what you read before reacting to it.
>>
>>Quite obviously the original comment meant that it wasn't a _world_
>>war until the U.S. declared war on Japan and Germany declared war on the
>>U.S. Before that, it was mainly a European war.
>
>So let me see - excluding Europe and going for the bigger
>countries I can think of from the top of my head...
>
>Canada was involved, India was involved, Japan was involved,
>China was involved, the Soviet Union was involved, South
>Africa was involved, Australia / New Zealand were involved -
>and it was a mainly European war...
>
>
>What was this about the intelligence of US posters?
>
The war was simply put, two wars, A pacific/asian and an Atlantic/European war.
After all the USSR didn't declare war on japan until July 1945 :) just in
time to nick the Kurile Islands.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,omp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark?
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 20:22:01 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 7 Jul 1999 18:27:09 GMT,
Fredrich P. Maney, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
>In comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>[deletia]
>
>: The USA was *supposedly* an ally from BEFORE the war...
>
>Actually, if I recall correctly (though it is quite possible I am confusing
>WWI and WWII again), the US was openly neutral until it was deliberately
>attacked.
Except for the little matter of depth charging German subs in international
waters, and soldiers in China, helping fight the japanese.
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric Wick)
Subject: Debian: NTP Time to RTC ?
Date: 9 Jul 1999 05:50:37 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hello,
just a simple and easy Question: Who can tell me the magic line to get the ntp
from a timeserver and save it to my rtc?
Bye
Eric
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: running seti@home
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 06:00:04 GMT
I downloaded and extracted two files: README and setiathome
I can't seem to execute setiathome. What am I doing wrong?...I see
the file as an executable...... I am a totally newbie at this.
I downloaded both i686..... and i386.... versions. I am running
Mandrake 6.0.
Thanks in advance for your help.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bruce Fletcher)
Subject: Re: Where is $PATH set in RH 6.0?
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 21:38:51 -0700
Ok, so thanks to everyone's help so far, we have identified several
possible PATH sources including
/bin/login (/usr/local/bin:/bin:/usr/bin)
/etc/profile ($PATH:/usr/X11R6/bin)
/etc/bashrc (nothing in my case)
$HOME/.bash_profile ($PATH:$HOME/Python-1.5.2:$HOME/bin)
$HOME/.bashrc (nothing in my case)
Unfortunately, no simple combination of the contents of these can add up
to my PATH:
/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/bruce/Pytho
n-1.5.2:/home/bruce/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/home/bruce/Python-1.5.2:/home/bruce/bin
So just where does this path all come from? I have no idea where the
first bit comes from:
/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:/usr/X11R6/bin:/bin
but it looks like /etc/profile and $HOME/.bash_profile are each executed
twice after that. Why would that be?
Puzzled,
- Bruce
------------------------------
From: Robert Komar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,omp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark?
Date: 9 Jul 1999 06:07:00 GMT
In comp.os.linux.misc Jim Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
: The war was simply put, two wars, A pacific/asian and an Atlantic/European war.
: After all the USSR didn't declare war on japan until July 1945 :) just in
: time to nick the Kurile Islands.
Not so simple. Much of South-East Asia was in the hands of the British and Dutch.
The Japanese conferred with the Germans prior to the war and decided that a
simultaneous attack on the European holdings was a good gamble for them since
the British navy would be concentrated nearer to home. The two theatres of war
were not independent.
Cheers,
Rob Komar
------------------------------
From: Ian Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: The price of honesty (was Re: G'bye, comp.os.linux.*)
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 07:57:45 +0000
"D.J. Birchall" wrote:
>
> Well folks, it looks like I won't be being my usual helpful self
> here in comp.os.linux.* anymore - or at least not from this address.
> As my boss put it in a lengthy memo to me this morning:
>
> When I review your time sheets I find it distressing to see you
> spending hours of time a day with "Mail and News"...
>
> I'm also not allowed to use my Linux laptop for work any more.
> So, in the interest of spending more time doing the things that he
> wants me to do (i.e. generating money), I'm going to have to stop
> doing the things I like to do (i.e. being helpful to Linux folks on
> Usenet and thus generating goodwill for the company). I hope
> everyone won't take this the wrong way, and will continue to think
> of DigitalFM as a place where helpful people work. Maybe some
> folks who'd like to do business with helpful people will even
> remember us when the time comes. :)
>
> But for now, I'm dropping off Usenet from this address, and will
> be posting from my personal (home) address instead.
>
> -Dan
>
> --
> _.-.-o-.-._ From the Linux laptop of D. Birchall, V.P. of Technology
> _\-\/:\/-/_ Digital Facilities Management, 132 Kings Hwy E Suite A-1
> ,\/~:~\/. Haddonfield, NJ - 856.4294777 - http://www.digitalfm.com
> ~ '~-:-~` ~ We Work the Web - Design, Hosting, Extranets, E-Commerce
PHBs respect time wasted on Word formatting, Powerpoint and unnecessary
flash web page design, not real communication I guess. Distressing, I
liked the mental image behind that, though [g].
Sad, but not altogether surprising.
Ian.
------------------------------
From: Ian Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,omp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark?
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 12:16:35 +0000
Darren Winsper wrote:
>
> On 7 Jul 1999 18:48:36 GMT, Fredrich P. Maney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > : I allways thaught that WW2 was a world war in the same way that the World
> > : series base ball is only plaied in the US :)
> >
> > That has far more to do with the fact that Baseball was invented in the
> > USA than any sort of national egotism.
>
> You have a funny definition of invented. It looks more like a
> derivative of rounders to me.
Duck and cover time?
ian.
------------------------------
From: Ian Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
comp.os.linux.networking,omp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.infosystems.www.servers.unix
Subject: Re: Could Microsoft Cheat On The New Mindcraft Benchmark?
Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 12:14:12 +0000
"Fredrich P. Maney" wrote:
>
> Maybe it has something to do with the amount of material and personnel
> that the US put into the effort compared to the rest of the world.
20 million dead Russians might disagree if they could. And all the
others.
Ian.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ('Wulff)
Subject: Re: Pronouncing "Linux" - your vote!
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 06:53:41 GMT
On 08 Jul 1999 18:51:18 -0400, Johan Kullstam
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrotf:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] ('Wulff) writes:
>
>> I gotta ask......Where does everyone get this "aboot" stuff from?
>> I've been a Canucklehead for 30+ years and the only time i've heard
>> anything remotely close to the pronunciation is from a Newfie
>> (Newfoundland)
>
>i had no idea toronto was in newfoundland!
Tarawna? who said anything aboot Tarawna?......hehe
'Wulff
How to recognize a Redneck.....
Only one long branch in his family tree.
------------------------------
From: "John E. Hagensieker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: kde log in
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 14:44:50 +0900
How do you make KDE the default log in RH 6.0. Gnome is currently the
default and KDE is easily accessible by selecting it at the log in screen
but I would like to make it the default.
Thanks.....John In Japan
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (brian moore)
Subject: Re: Handling Time on Linux
Date: 9 Jul 1999 06:14:08 GMT
On 9 Jul 1999 02:01:03 GMT,
Hans Kruger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello everybody
>
> I am using my Linux-station to dial in to the internet. Every time I
> connect to my ISP the clock ist automaticly updated via NTP. I would like
> to know how can I handle ?day_saving_time? (that kind of thing, when the
> clock ist shift +/- one hour - Don't know if that is the correct word :).
> I am in Brazil. So I should be using EST as mine /etc/localtime. Till now I
> have updated to clock by just using an other GMT-? Setting. I would like t
> know if there is another way in doing that.
If you use Linux exclusively on your computer it's easy: keep your
hardware clock in UTC.
The software clock (what Linux uses while running) is always kept in UTC
and converted when you ask for it to be converted. This allows for
'zoneinfo' files to describe your time (including oddities like the one
year in the 1970's where the USA stayed on DST during the Winter).
There are four zoneinfo files for Brasil:
/usr/share/zoneinfo/right/Brazil/Acre
/usr/share/zoneinfo/right/Brazil/DeNoronha
/usr/share/zoneinfo/right/Brazil/East
/usr/share/zoneinfo/right/Brazil/West
By pointing /usr/share/zoneinfo/localtime to the proper one, your time
will automatically adjust itself correctly for DST and Standard time (it
will change the offset from UTC at the proper time and date, in other
words).
--
Brian Moore | "The Zen nature of a spammer resembles
Sysadmin, C/Perl Hacker | a cockroach, except that the cockroach
Usenet Vandal | is higher up on the evolutionary chain."
Netscum, Bane of Elves. Peter Olson, Delphi Postmaster
------------------------------
** 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
******************************
