Hi !
Thank you for your email ! I'm sorry that my reply took some time, but i
had to become a BSEE before (that was what took my time, i don't need to be
an engineer to write an email).
>DK> >You thought wrong dude. No one ever said Linux was "bugless"
>DK>
>DK> This reply was more aimed to the way Marc Mutz replied to it coming
along
>DK> a bit like the "superior user of Linux who is better than the rest of the
>DK> universe". On some days i get ticked off pretty easy, hehe.
>
>Yep, me too. But this whole thing is starting to get a little out of
>hand. Mark's original comments (you come from a Windoze world...) were
>said very "tongue-in-cheek".
It is that the experienced Linux community takes those who switch from
Windows to Linux or even do the fatal thing using it side by side as
brainless wierdos - at least that is my impression. I don't feel retarded
for using Windows and it defenitely has some things to it, that make life
easier for me.
Btw, what does "tongue-in-cheek" mean ?
I tried to continue with the humour, but
>unfortuately got onto a bit of a soap-box...sorry.
I discussed that part with MM and it's fine now, wasn't meant to be
insulting from both sides. It is just that a newbie has nothing from
knowing that he is a newbie and that the workaround for his problem is a
satanic act. Instead of pointing out who is a real linux user i rather see
some constructive advice from these real users and not some one line or
even single work mails - even if the danger is there that they have to do
autoplagiatism and reply themselves a dozen times.
>
>DK> If you are talking about Microsoft Windows 95 i can only say that i
>DK> installed it in September 95 and had to do one reinstall because i was
>DK> using a broken Bus master driver. I bet Linux would be messed up pretty
>DK> much if its kernel is partly broken. Besides that i run that system
without
>DK> any problems every day, no data loss, no brakadowns, no problems at all.
>DK> That's why I don't understand why all the others have so much trouble
with
>DK> it. I have mostly widely supported hardware, e.g. a genuine SB and not
one
>DK> of these 66% compatibles, same with my board, nic, scanner, streamer,
>DK> drives, video card and so on, so maybe that's why.
>DK> I don't call W95 "da bomb" of OS, but i really wonder very hard why my
>DK> copy is working so well and all the others don't.
>
>You are lucky. At the time Win95 came out I was retailing
>hardware/software to the SOHO market. Sold a lot of systems, sold a truck
>load of Win95...Had a mountain of problems. I even spoke to a Microsoft
>tech-support guy who said that on average most installations of Win95 get
>re-installed once a month.
As is said, there may be the day where it comes to me too. That was the
day before yesterday when my W95 showed me a new bootup screen telling me
that some VxD service couldn't be found and that now my system is destroyed.
After a reboot (lol) it worked fine and smoothly and everything is as it
was before. But that is the second time i recall that sth major was
reported to me and i'm running that system even on a heavily overclocked
system.
For me it is hard to understand why ppl have to do reinstalls so often.
Maybe it is why my system is an upgrade from the upgrade, it is a W3.1 ->
W3.11fWG -> W95a -> W95b upgraded system. Maybe that made the bugs equalize
each other, lol.
>Oh, and if you would like to see your Win95 crash, just turn it on and
>leave it after 46.something days it _WILL_ crash. This is a Microsoft
>documented bug/feature. And the best thing is that you don't even have to
>do anything...just turn it on...Windoze will do the rest.
As i said, in 4 years using it i counted two major bugs resulting in one
reinstall. If i don't use my puter then i normally switch it off, so this
bugfeature won't get to me anyways as i bet to 95% of the common W95 users
as well. Who runs a W95 based server for a 24/7 network or as a web server
or as an ftp ? Not that it technically won't work, but for sth like that
there are defenitely better systems, e.g. Linux, especially in security tasks.
>DK> >2 - To upgrade the kernel
>DK>
>DK> Never did that, I'm a bit afraid of that after I tried to get soundcard
>DK> support into a SuSE 6.0 and therefore had to recompile the kernel (great,
>DK> isn't it ?). As a bloody newbie that is not really what one should start
>DK> with. I'm keen on one of these 2.2 kernels, but right now there are new
>DK> patch levels every week and i go fine with my 2.0.36.
>
>Everything is difficult if you don't know how. Nothing in Linux is
>actually hard to do. Sometimes you just need to be carefull and to take
>precautions (make backups of working kernels before you start messing
>around).
Is there anything for a modern system in the 2.2 kernel that is worth
upgrading ? Is there a doc where the changes / new features are listed ?
>
>As for thinking about a 2.2 kernel. My advice would be to stick to 2.0.36
>if it's working for you. Then when your ready get a Distribution CD that
>has a 2.2 kernel on it. (pretty sure that SuSe has released a 2.2
>version).
After damn negative experiences with SuSE 6.0 i'm not that keen on any
SuSE CDs anymore. My RH 5.2 works far better.
>DK> >3 - For the people who can't bear to let go of Microsoft's apron-strings
>DK>
>DK> That is not really the reason why i shutdown my Linux box after i
used it.
>DK> Its pretty noisy and in order to save the environment and engery i see no
>DK> good reason to let it run 24/7 if i use it only once in a while.
>
>If your machine is that noisy that you can't bear to have it on 24/7,
>perhaps you should have someone take a look at it. Computers aren't
>supposed to make a great deal of noise...unless your engrossed in a game
>of Linux DooM II :-)
It is that i constantly have the cover open. For checking out other puters
of friends i need from time to time some parts to try out, so i just take
mine. This makes me hear that dizzling sound of the fan and the drives and
it gets annyoing if it whistles right into my ear when i try to sleep.
But anyways, i don't feel less intelligent if i shut down my puters if i
don't use them.
>DK> My aim is to get the turn to Linux completely, but as long as I don't
have
>DK> a clue of half what is going on and i can't do the same tasks as with my
>DK> W95 i will use it both in good brotherhood with BeOS.
>
>Cool. But if you make yourself say "no, I'm not going to boot into
>Windoze just to do so and so, I'm gonna nut this out if it kills me",
>you'll probably get to your ultimate dream sooner. :)
Hmmm, yea, but i want stuff like my cd-toaster, scanner, printer,
tapedrive working before i kick my windows from the drive. Not saying that
it won't work with Linux, but right now i have no time to spend days and
nights to figure out how stuff works - it just has to run somehow.
>BTW, what's BeOS like? Just curious.
It is fast, fancy, colourful and stable. The disadvantage yet is that
there is hardly any software available and that Be invented a new file
system - as if there are not enough around.
I tried to install it to 3 puters with (halfways) regular hardware and it
doesn't even install on two of them. Reminds me of OS/2 in this part.
>
>DK> My intention why i like Linux is not because i hate W95 to death and
wish
>DK> Bill Gates to rot in hell as it seems to be the motivation for tons of
>DK> linux users. IMHO W95 is easier to use than Linux, what doesn't make it
>DK> technically better, but for "users" that is what they want - use the
>DK> computer and not get a nervous breakdown because they want to install sth
>DK> silly like ICQ or an FTP program. I ran into tremendous problems with
doing
>
>Perhaps we should stop talking about "users" and refer to "passengers" and
>"drivers". IMHO W95 is for "passengers", people who are happy to plod
>along and do whatever the software companies say and not worry too much
>when things go wrong.
Yea, but as i said, to me there is nothing majorly wrong the way that OS
is and i don't want to be permanently blamed for that. What's wrong with
going the easy way ?
And Linux is for "drivers", people who want to take
>control of how things are done on their own computer, and when something
>goes wrong they're not afraid to take a look under the hood.
Yea, but right now it is more that my Linux has the control over me and
leaves me no hint on how to change that. Luckily i found this list that
gives a great support.
>When the Linux "driver" gets in over his/her head, he/she comes to places
>like this for assistance (not to have it done for them). And we won't
>charge them a minimum of $35 just to say "hello, what's the problem".
As StarDivision does for the Linux StarOffice ?? Be aware, the software
giants invade the Linux world.
>Did you get the ICQ thing sorted, or are you still having trouble. Let us
>know and we'll help.
I got it sorted after getting several heart attacks about this evil
c++-compiler crap. But the result was worth it.
>DK> that on Linux and i'm sick of missing dependencies or 75 MB downloads
that
>
>Tell us exactly what the problem is and we'll try to help.
I did in another email.
>
>DK> then are an "unknown tar-archive" or request a file that is available
under
>
>One possible cause could be that you are downloading in Windoze and it is
>mangling the filename.
I did it under Linux.
>
>DK> a slightly different name. I bitched about that in dozens of postings to
>DK> the newbie list and Arandir and me came up with the idea to start a
>DK> Software-installation-HOWTO as soon as we have time for sth major like
>DK> that. I think that would be a great support for anyone who uses Linux and
>DK> likes to install something neat like a StarOffice 5.1. I still try to do,
>DK> but i can't even unpack the package *argls*.
>
>Sounds like a good idea, a Software-installation-HOWTO. Don't know if it
>would be very long though...
> unpack package
> few lines and examples on how to do this
> read the docs
> do what the docs say
>
>Sorry, I'm just being a little facetious. Honestly, I think it's a good
>idea. Let me know if you would like a hand.
Wellllllllll, that is what i thought when i started to install software
that was not included in my distribution. If it always just would be like
./configure - make - make install, then i would be happy and not bug this
list with long emails. My experience shows that in some few cases it is
like this and it then also works the way it is supposed to be.
As i said, with that LICQ it should have been like that, but it wasn't coz
there is libstdc++ version 2.9 flying around with at least two names.
>DK> Recently i have the problem from time to time that keyboard and mouse
>DK> crash under X, looks like the whole system halts for some reason. Other
>DK> days it runs smooth. So my RedHat 5.2 seems not to be that stable as
>DK> everyone tries to make me think - and what shall i do then if i can't
give
>DK> commands (yea, telnet into ur machine....i will then after i finally
set up
>DK> the network where everyone says too that it is sooo easy :/).
>DK> In that case i see no other chance than to press the so widely hated
reset
>DK> button.
>
>Here's one thing that the 2.2 kernel excells in. Support for the "Magic
>SysRq" key. (on my keyboard it's the "Print Screen/SysRQ" key). You press
>alt+SysRq+k and it tells the kernel to kill everything on that console.
Yes, that would be great, but it is that my keyboard locks up, no
keystroke is working anymore, no mouse pointer to move.
>It gets top priority in the kernel. But alas, you are using a 2.0 kernel
>so that's not an option for you :(
Hmm, if 2.2 kernel include a guarantee for non-freezing keyboard
support........i doubt heavily that this is a hardware error.
>Have you tried switching to another console (ctrl+alt+F2) then killing of
>X?
The keyboard is frozen, no way to do anything to the machine.
Or have you tried just leaving it sit there for a while (10 or 20
>minutes - go and have a coffee), it might not have "crashed" it could be
>that it is just really busy.
Hmmmm, i haven't tried that, would be interesting what process running
takes up the power of a P2-233 64MB system for 10 minutes without drive
access. Besides that i move soon to Connecticut, the people there have
absolutely no patience and i have to get adjusted to that. *joke*
>DK> Gee, some like rootbeer and some don't. You know what i mean ?
>
>In the computer world, some like to drink Microsoft rootbeer and some like
>to brew thier own. :)
Hehehe, i do both and like it and it seems ppl think that is crazy.
Thanks for reading this long email to the end. ;)
Greez
Dave
