Re: Just a Proposition....:-)))
On Mon, 6 Jan 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Well, I'm just a newbie but I'd like a new installation routine for > debian. I have the following proposition for future installation > routines. > First dselect is not very user friendly...and for a newbie it's say > difficult to use...:-)) It gives the possibility to install MANY > packages. Of course sometimes I do not know whether I'll ever need them. > Later dpkg always needs magical spells to make it work. What U think > about something like this: Yeah. That's probably the only gripe I have about Debian. dselect sucks. I hate it with a passion! I'm thinking it would be probably be just as easy to use dpkg directly. I love dpkg 'tho. The dselect program needs a rewrite, IMHO. Give it a better UI or something. == Arcadio Alivio Sincero, Jr. Undergraduate Computer Science Major/Linux Enthusiast/Competitive Bodybuilder email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW:Not available yet -- still looking for free webspace! "Bare feet magnetize sharp metal objects so they point upward from the floor, especially in the dark." -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Good buy or not?
On Sun, 5 Jan 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > it as new? Do their machines use standard memory components, so they > could be easily upgraded with parts from other vendors, etc? They don't AFAIK, PBs use proprietary parts which means you usually have to buy from them to get upgrade parts. Not a good thing, IMHO. Not only are your options limited, but you usually pay a lot more buying from PB. > My current machine is an old 486 box, and I need space for an > additional HD, etc. Running an AMD 486/133, so this machine would not > really be much of an upgrade in itself in terms of performance, but if > possible, I would quickly upgrade its cpu and memory. Would this be a > decent platform to build on or not? Hmm ... I think an AMD 5x86/133 is the fastest 486 you can ever get. For about $150 or so, you can get a Pentium MB with a AMD K5/100. If your current video is ISA, you'll also benefit from being able to buy a PCI video card. That'll set you back about $50 or so for a mid-range SVGA card with something like 1MB DRAM. == Arcadio Alivio Sincero, Jr. Undergraduate Computer Science Major/Linux Enthusiast/Competitive Bodybuilder email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW:Not available yet -- still looking for free webspace! "Bare feet magnetize sharp metal objects so they point upward from the floor, especially in the dark." -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trident Video Card on X
On Tue, 31 Dec 1996, Alexander Gieg wrote: > I've an old Trident 8900D SVGA Video Card, which works > well with X Windows, svgalib and SVGATextMode. > Problem #1: > --- > The problem is that this card works only with 8 bpp in X. > The file /usr/doc/X11/README.trident say that the model > 8900D can work with 16 bpp, sometimes with the lines > Option "linear" > and > DefaultColorDeep 16 > (or something like those, I don't remember now) in the > proper locations. When I try on of that, or both, there > are error messages about my chipset don't supporting > the 16 bpp mode. In Windows 3.1 and Windows 95 I can > use 16 bpp. Is your card an ISA card? How much system memory do you have? If it is an ISA card and you have 16MB or more of system memory, then you can't get to 16bpp because an ISA bus can only address 16MB of memory at one time, and XFree86 currently requires linear addressing with that chipset. I'm no expert in this field, but I've experienced much pain in trying to get higher than 8bpp with XFree86 myself. I purchased a Cirrus Logic based ISA card with 2MB of DRAM. I have 24MB of system RAM. This chipset also requires linear addressing. So I couldn't get to > 8bpp either. But, using the bundled Windows drivers, I was able to exploit the full potential of this card (24bpp at 800x600 I believe) from Windows. Kind of annoying, really. You can always try out the commerical X servers (MetroX is one ... I recently read somewhere that it's being included on InfoMagic's LDR, which is only $50!!). What I'm gonna do is give my system a major overhaul ... I'm gonna yank out the motherboard and stick in a Pentium one with PCI slots (ISA video sucks anyways). There's no linear addressing problem with PCI cards, I believe. == Arcadio Alivio Sincero, Jr. Undergraduate Computer Science Major/Linux Enthusiast/Competitive Bodybuilder email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW:Not available yet -- still looking for free webspace! "Bare feet magnetize sharp metal objects so they point upward from the floor, especially in the dark." -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problem linking with libtermcap!
Hello Mailing List!, I seem to be having a problem linking with the Termcap library when specifying "-ltermcap" on the gcc command line. Explicitly specifying libtermcap works fine (i.e. "gcc -o program program.o module1.o /lib/libtermcap.so.2.0.8"). But doing a "-ltermcap" results in ld saying that it can't open it! I have a copy of "libtermcap.so.2.0.8" in my "/lib" directory. I also have a "libtermcap.so.2" symlinked to it in that directory; presumably placed there by ldconfig, because I didn't put it there. Doing a "ldconfig -v" verifies this, because "libtermcap.so.2 => libtermcap.so.2.0.8" gets listed. Anybody have any ideas? The current workaround right now is simply explicityly specifying libtermcap.so.2.0.8 on the gcc command line. But this is a pain in the butt when compiling other people's programs which uses termcap. I'm using Debian GNU/Linux v1.1, libc v5.4.13, gcc v2.7.2, and I'm not really sure which version of ld.so I'm using (I guess the one that's in Debian 1.1), but the version of ld I'm using (as reported by ld -v) is v2.6). Thanks in advance for any help with this! == Arcadio Alivio Sincero, Jr. Undergraduate Computer Science Major/Linux Enthusiast/Competitive Bodybuilder email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW:Not available yet -- still looking for free webspace! "Bare feet magnetize sharp metal objects so they point upward from the floor, especially in the dark." -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What's xbooks?
Hello mailing list, When I was downloading XFree 3.2 off of Debian's ftp site, I noticed a new package that I don't wasn't in Debian 1.1. It was "xbooks" or something like that. And it was huge. So I didn't download it. What is "xbooks"? == Arcadio Alivio Sincero, Jr. Undergraduate Computer Science Major/Linux Enthusiast/Competitive Bodybuilder email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW:Not available yet -- still looking for free webspace! "Bare feet magnetize sharp metal objects so they point upward from the floor, especially in the dark." -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
About XFree86 3.2 ...
Hello, When you installed XFree 3.2, did you experience any problems with the xrdb utility not working? When I first tried it, xrdb would exit with a "can't run '/usr/lib/cpp -Dblablabla' with a whole bunch of '-D' switches following the 'cpp' part. I checked out my '/usr/lib/cpp', and sure enough it was there (actually a symlink to /usr/bin/cpp). In fact, I was recompiling something at the same time, so I know it's gotta be working right. Specifying a '-nocpp' on the xrdb command line seems to have done the trick. But I hate doing these sort of kludges ... I really like to know why it didn't work without the '-nocpp' switch. (Like, perhaps I forgot to install a package or something like that ... this can only mean trouble later on ...). Do you have any idea? Or should I just be content with that fix? == Arcadio Alivio Sincero, Jr. Undergraduate Computer Science Major/Linux Enthusiast/Competitive Bodybuilder email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW:Not available yet -- still looking for free webspace! "Do something unusual today. Pay a bill." -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: XFree86 3.2??
> XFree 3.2 is in the new unstable tree: /pub/debian/bo/binary-i386/x11 > > I recently upgraded to 3.2 and it hasn't crashed on me yet :) > Hello, I just want to make sure that I'm doing this right. I just downloaded from the above site what I believe to be everything I need to upgrade from XFree86 3.1.2 to 3.2. Now, do I just do, as root, type "dpkg -i " and the Debian package utility will do everything for me? For example, to upgrade package xbase for v3.1.2 to xbase for v3.2 I just type "dpkg -i xbase" and dpkg will automatically remove everything related to v3.1.2 for xbase and put in the new ones in for me? Do I need to do any extra housekeeping? Thanks in advance for any help on this matter! == Arcadio Alivio Sincero, Jr. Undergraduate Computer Science Major/Linux Enthusiast/Competitive Bodybuilder email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW:Not available yet -- still looking for free webspace! "Do something unusual today. Pay a bill." -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
