Re: I quit
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005, william gatlin wrote: My opinion is that x.org isn't integrated quite well enough yet for prime time. My BSD books don't have the new commands and other information to be of any use and the Man pages that downloaded were of no help either. So, use XFree. ports is still loaded with the XFree86 stuff. Use the old stuff. Just because x.org is default, does not mean you are stuck with it. I think, by and large, you are being unfair in your assesment. BSD, unlike the clones (linux, and their like) is a different kettle of fish. I love all of my BSD's. From my many FBSD boxes, to my OS X Darwin web server. FreeBSD is indeed ready for prime time. However, I think your assesment of what is "primetime" ready is flawed. By and large, you need to be able to read, and get "dirty" with things. So for now I'm going to try to load Slackware and hope that maybe in a year BSD will be easier to wade through. I have to admit a bit of sorrow in having to do this as I wanted them both on the same machine. Uhm. Slackware? You can't make FreeBSD work, and you are going to the real "roll your own" distro of linux? *shrugs*. I think by and large, you are, as I said, being unfair to FreeBSD. Having used RedHat, Debian, and having started with slackware many a year ago, I have to say, FreeBSD 5.3 is by far, some of the best UNIX experiences I have ever had. From install to operation. Documentation is stellar, and I have yet to encounter a problem that isint solvable by: 1) Searching the mailing list. 2) Reading the handbook. I think that says alot. -- Duo ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: I quit
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Shane Ambler > Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 1:40 AM > To: FreeBSD Mailing Lists; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: I quit > > > Out of interest - it was microsoft that stopped Mac OS X for > intel being > released. Many don't remember or just don't discuss - when > apple bought out > NeXT - it was running on intel hardware and the first > developer release of > OS X included an intel version Don't put too much credence in this - an intel version isn't much good to anyone if it only runs on one single motherboard model # in the world. - then came the publicity deal > between MS and > Apple - MS agreed to continue development of office for mac and bought > $15 in Apple stock and Apple agreed to drop all the > lawsuits against MS. > > The intel version has never been heard of since. > This is really stretching it. Microsoft has little to fear from Apple bringing out an Intel version of MacOS X, they are much more afraid of Linux. There's really 3 major overriding problems that Apple would have to overcome before doing an intel port of MacOS X: 1) It would lose them immediate sales of Apple hardware since a good number of Mac users would stop buying PowerPC gear. This is particularly true in corporations. Most corporate IT departments cannot stand any gear that doesen't meet the corporate cookie-cutter standard, ie: Mac gear, and even if they have users who are rabid Mac users, if they could field MacOS X on standard Wintel hardware they would do so in a second. Perhaps in the long term they would make up lost revenue on hardware sales by increasing their market share, but there would be an immediate short-term sales loss. And also keep in mind most Mac gear still goes through local Mac dealers, it's not sold online like Dell/HP/Compaq/IBM/Gateway pc gear, if you were a local Mac dealer and all the sudden you had every corner cloner shop undercutting you on sales of Apple Macalikes, you would probably tell Apple 'screw you buddy, I'm going to start selling Wintel clones' 2) Apple selling MacOS X on Wintel gear puts it in direct competition with the corner cloners selling Wintel boxes with RedHat preloads, and they are going to lose big time there. Not to mention the inevitable Macintosh applications that will run on Mac hardware and need to be rebuilt for Macalike hardware, due to stupid bugs and such. 3) If your a conspiracy theorist consider what would happen if Apple were to abandon IBM processors and start using Intel CPU's. Intel nearly got nailed on antitrust violations itself, remember, and it was only because Intel was very eager to negotiate with the FCC and readily submitted to all kinds of restrictions that the entire matter was quietly swept under the rug. (unlike the Microsoft fiasco which did a lot of damage to Microsoft's image, and emboldened the Europeans to nail them) Intel almost certainly would not want to see this as it would increase their market share to unhealthy levels, to the point where they would be at serious risk of an antitrust lawsuit despite their previous cooperation. It is in Intel's interest to see processor competition for PC hardware - quite obviously not a huge amount - but enough so that they are safe from accusations of monopolistic practices. Apple could not move to Intel in a production capacity without good cooperation from Intel, and Intel wouldn't want to cooperate with them because they wouldn't want them to move to Intel chips. > The fact that they maintain the intel version of darwin means they can > release an intel version at any time. The fact that they maintain it is because they want to get free development time from the open source community. > > But then maybe they want their bases open so they can change > their hardware > to intel - they fell out with motorola and now get the G5's > from IBM. This is a fantasy. Apple makes more money in one year than you, I, and most likely everyone else on this list will see in a lifetime. Yes, their annual sales are dwarfed by Microsoft's - but they still have money coming out of their arseholes. There comes a time when the money made by an organization doesen't translate anymore into the tangible things it means to you and I - like food, a home, a car, some free time, etc. - and simply becomes a meaningless number with a bunch of zeros behind it. So what - the other guy has more zeros behind his take than you do - both of you have so much money that you could spend the rest of your life boffing every Sports Illustrated model that poses in the swimsuit edition if you felt like it. It becomes nothing more than a game for all of these people. > And > there have been times before OS X when they looked a
Re: I quit
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:11:38 -0500 Chuck Swiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote >Scott Bennett wrote: >> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 19:01:26 -0600 David Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >[ ... ] >> That may be true. I don't really know because I haven't looked at >> Darwin source. However, essentially everything in NextStep above the >> kernel that was not part of the OOPS was taken directly from 4.3BSD. > >...or from the FSF, or from Sun, or from CMU, or from MIT, or from Adobe, >depending. Well, well. So Steve Jobs now thinks UNIX "utilities" might be important after all? Wonders never cease... > >Almost all of the compiler toolchain was GNU, Sun provided minor things like >NFS, NIS, and RPC, CMU provided Mach itself, and together with MIT provided >AFS and X11, Adobe provided PostScript, fonts & font management, and DPS. > >>>BSD tradition Apple freely picked from here and there, whatever they >>>thought best, and made what can only be said to be their own. Looks great. >> >> Keep in mind that Mach 2.x *was* a heavily modified 4.3BSD kernel. >> Mach 3.x and later is not. > >The NeXT Mach 2.5 kernel was not a modified BSD kernel. Sigh. It was indeed. Keep reading. > >It was a monolithic kernel which supported dynamic loading of kernel objects, >Mach messaging and exception handling (rather than BSD signals, which were >emulated for BSD compatibility purposes), SMP & NUMA aSMP, and an integrated >task/thread paradigm unrelated to normal BSD process semantics, etc. > All that stuff was hacked onto a 4.3BSD kernel. That's how Mach 2 got its start. The CMU folks did not start out be reinventing the wheel, the transmission, the engine, etc. Much 4.3BSD stuff was replaced at CMU, and much was simply added onto it, but the source they started with was 4.3BSD. Mach stopped using a 4.3BSD-based kernel at Mach 3.0, which was the first microkernel release of Mach. NEXTSTEP didn't make the leap to the Mach 3.x architecture. If Mac OSX/Darwin has done so, then that's great. If not, then a great opportunity was missed. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * ** ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
Scott Bennett wrote: On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 19:01:26 -0600 David Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [ ... ] That may be true. I don't really know because I haven't looked at Darwin source. However, essentially everything in NextStep above the kernel that was not part of the OOPS was taken directly from 4.3BSD. ...or from the FSF, or from Sun, or from CMU, or from MIT, or from Adobe, depending. Almost all of the compiler toolchain was GNU, Sun provided minor things like NFS, NIS, and RPC, CMU provided Mach itself, and together with MIT provided AFS and X11, Adobe provided PostScript, fonts & font management, and DPS. BSD tradition Apple freely picked from here and there, whatever they thought best, and made what can only be said to be their own. Keep in mind that Mach 2.x *was* a heavily modified 4.3BSD kernel. Mach 3.x and later is not. The NeXT Mach 2.5 kernel was not a modified BSD kernel. It was a monolithic kernel which supported dynamic loading of kernel objects, Mach messaging and exception handling (rather than BSD signals, which were emulated for BSD compatibility purposes), SMP & NUMA aSMP, and an integrated task/thread paradigm unrelated to normal BSD process semantics, etc. -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
Kevin Kinsey wrote: Just "bin" works. But you'll _absolutely_ want to do that. <*slight* exaggeration>Why M$ assumes the only thing you'll ever want to d/l via ftp is ASCII text is beyond me It's not the worst thing I've seen - when you want to transfer a text file from OS390/zOS, you are in deep water. =) zOS's native charset is EBCDIC. When you use ASCII transfer mode, all you get on an ASCII-based system is garbage. When you convert the file to ASCII on the mainframe and transfer it via ASCII, you get garbage. What you have to do is transfer the file in binary mode and convert it manually either before or afterwards. Kind regards, Benjamin ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On 10/1/05 7:03 PM, "Scott Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > But even so, much of FreeBSD came directly from 4.[34]BSD anyway. I've > glanced at a few of the header files in Mac OSX libraries, and they are > still chock full of labels beginning with "NS" or "NX". :-) > All the NS.. object names are from the OOP and didn't get renamed when apple took over - I guess apple didn't want to give the NeXT developers the extra work in updating their software. This only relates to the cocoa based gui programs. The cli software uses the bsd(based) libs and is mostly taken from FreeBSD now. I have heard that most of the darwin committers are also FreeBSD committers. >> BSD tradition Apple freely picked from here and there, whatever they >> thought best, and made what can only be said to be their own. > >Keep in mind that Mach 2.x *was* a heavily modified 4.3BSD kernel. > Mach 3.x and later is not. You may be interested that according to Apple they are ditching the Mach kernel. From 10.4 - due for release in the next 6 months they are using a kernel based on FreeBSD 5 - with ACL's etc. That's the way I read it anyway - they don't refer to the new kernel as Mach based anymore. See - apple.com/macosx/tiger/unix.html applications you need. I talked my 11 year old nephew through an operating system upgrade (clean installation) of his ibook over the phone -- including wireless networking with WEP. >>> Unfortunately, Apple has not released a version for Intel >>> processors, >>> so it won't help someone with a pee cee instead of a Mac. >> >> Wrong, its called Darwin. If you think FreeBSD is raw then go play with >> Darwin for a bit. Darwin is used for both i386 and PowerPC. MacOS X is >> Darwin plus the fantastic Apple GUI and other neat Apple stuff. >> >I see. So is it just the GUI that's missing in Darwin? Or is the > entire OOPS missing? I guess it's nice to know that the underlying system > is available for the pee cee architecture, but it couldn't be nearly as fun > without the OOPS. :-) > Yes the OOP you refer to - now called cocoa, previously NeXTStep/Openstep - is part of the GUI. Actually it is broken into two parts - appkit and foundation - foundation is unrelated to the gui providing data structs (NSString, NSArray etc) the appkit contains NSWindow, NSButton, NSCheckbox etc that is integral to the gui. But it is all bundled together with the window server into what Apple calls 'cocoa' and sells only with Mac OS X. You can try gnu-darwin.org - this is a ppc/x86 darwin distro with X-windows etc. Out of interest - it was microsoft that stopped Mac OS X for intel being released. Many don't remember or just don't discuss - when apple bought out NeXT - it was running on intel hardware and the first developer release of OS X included an intel version - then came the publicity deal between MS and Apple - MS agreed to continue development of office for mac and bought $15 in Apple stock and Apple agreed to drop all the lawsuits against MS. The intel version has never been heard of since. The fact that they maintain the intel version of darwin means they can release an intel version at any time. The structure is in place to have current software recompile for different processors and even include multiple cpu binaries in the one application distribution. But then maybe they want their bases open so they can change their hardware to intel - they fell out with motorola and now get the G5's from IBM. And there have been times before OS X when they looked at getting the Mac OS running on intel hardware - it was between intel and motorola before they changed to the RISC based PPC. -- Shane Ambler Sales Department 007Marketing.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 20:20:29 -0500 Bob Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 06:17:36PM -0600, Scott Bennett wrote: >> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 08:54:55 -0600 Andrew L. Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >> >Mac OSX is based upon FreeBSD and may have native versions of the >> >> Mac OSX was--and unless something has changed drastically in the last >> few weeks, still is--based upon NextStep, another proprietary UNIX that was >> based upon a Mach 2.4-2.5 kernel and 4.3BSD above that. > >>From http://developer.apple.com/unix/: > Specifically, it is based in part on BSD 4.4 Lite. On a system > level, many of the design decisions are made to align with > BSD-style UNIX systems. Most libraries and utilities are from > FreeBSD (http://www.freebsd.org/), but some are derived from > NetBSD (http://www.netbsd.org/). For future development, Mac OS X > has adopted FreeBSD as a reference code base for BSD technology. > Work is ongoing to more closely synchronize all BSD tools and > libraries with the FreeBSD-stable branch.. > >Your statements applied to the original OSX. It has shifted to 4.4BSD, It's difficult to imagine the 4.4BSD kernel having been used in Mac OSX. But the remaining parts of the system make sense. >Mach 3, and FBSD during the course of development, with lots of The Mach 3 kernel could be used, though there would have to be a mountain of stuff written into the servers to provide all the stuff that the rest of the system depended upon in the earlier Mach 2.x-based kernel. However, if that's what Apple has done, then that's great! >contributions from Net and OpenBSD. The changes didn't happen in the >last few weeks. They happened continuously during the system's >development. Thanks for the information. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * ** ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 19:01:26 -0600 David Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Jan 9, 2005, at 6:17 PM, Scott Bennett wrote: > >> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 08:54:55 -0600 Andrew L. Gould >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> wrote: >> >>> Mac OSX is based upon FreeBSD and may have native versions of the >> >> Mac OSX was--and unless something has changed drastically in the >> last >> few weeks, still is--based upon NextStep, another proprietary UNIX >> that was >> based upon a Mach 2.4-2.5 kernel and 4.3BSD above that. > >Thats a Linux fallacy, that the kernel makes the OS. Apple's collection Fine. So what? I didn't make that claim. The 4.3BSD team implicitly did, though. (See the kernel's program logic manual, _The_Design_and _Implementation_of_the_4.3BSD_UNIX_Operating_System_.) >of command line utilities we commonly think of as the Unix interface >come from FreeBSD. As for what I've seen of the Darwin kernel, in grand That may be true. I don't really know because I haven't looked at Darwin source. However, essentially everything in NextStep above the kernel that was not part of the OOPS was taken directly from 4.3BSD. Perhaps Apple has since replaced all that software with the FreeBSD version. But even so, much of FreeBSD came directly from 4.[34]BSD anyway. I've glanced at a few of the header files in Mac OSX libraries, and they are still chock full of labels beginning with "NS" or "NX". :-) >BSD tradition Apple freely picked from here and there, whatever they >thought best, and made what can only be said to be their own. Keep in mind that Mach 2.x *was* a heavily modified 4.3BSD kernel. Mach 3.x and later is not. > >>> applications you need. I talked my 11 year old nephew through an >>> operating system upgrade (clean installation) of his ibook over the >>> phone -- including wireless networking with WEP. >>> >> Unfortunately, Apple has not released a version for Intel >> processors, >> so it won't help someone with a pee cee instead of a Mac. > >Wrong, its called Darwin. If you think FreeBSD is raw then go play with >Darwin for a bit. Darwin is used for both i386 and PowerPC. MacOS X is >Darwin plus the fantastic Apple GUI and other neat Apple stuff. > I see. So is it just the GUI that's missing in Darwin? Or is the entire OOPS missing? I guess it's nice to know that the underlying system is available for the pee cee architecture, but it couldn't be nearly as fun without the OOPS. :-) Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * ** ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 01:42 pm, Kevin Kinsey wrote: > Malcolm Kay wrote: > >On a MS system you'll probably need to set the file mode to prevent > >\n being translated to \r\n. It can be quite frustarating to realise > >this only after hours of download :- > > > >ftp> binary > > > > > >Malcolm > > Just "bin" works. But you'll _absolutely_ want to do > that. > > <*slight* exaggeration>Why M$ assumes the only thing you'll ever want > to d/l via ftp is ASCII text is beyond me As I recall ftp way back to the year dot assumes text transfers by default. It is just that this makes no difference for unix and unix like systems. So it needs "bin" on any system that uses other than \n as text record terminator including some that use a simple \r (OS9?). Malcolm ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
Malcolm Kay wrote: On a MS system you'll probably need to set the file mode to prevent \n being translated to \r\n. It can be quite frustarating to realise this only after hours of download :- ftp> binary Malcolm Just "bin" works. But you'll _absolutely_ want to do that. <*slight* exaggeration>Why M$ assumes the only thing you'll ever want to d/l via ftp is ASCII text is beyond me Kevin Kinsey ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
william gatlin wrote: So for now I'm going to try to load Slackware and hope that maybe in a year BSD will be easier to wade through. I have to admit a bit of sorrow in having to do this as I wanted them both on the same machine. Dual-booting is rather an advanced topic. So are several other things you mentioned in your message (that I have snipped). Did you follow procedures and recommende practices from the Project's handbook, or just G'n'G (Google && Guess?) GnG is rather a 'Linuxy' way to do things; FreeBSD has a very solid handbook that touches most major aspects of system installation and configuration. It's all I used to set up my first FBSD Desktop over a year ago (but I was rather familiar with the installation as I've been using FBSD on servers for almost four years). I do realize that I'm assuming that you didn't read or download the Handbook. As you mention below, I mean no disrespect either. However, I'm inclined to think that a person who follows the Handbook closely will generally be successful in installation and configuration of the operating system. If you found chapters or paragraphs or sentences in the Handbook to be confusing, I'm sure that the FPD (FreeBSD Documentation Project) would desire to know about it --- they are at [EMAIL PROTECTED] At the same time I wish to communicate my respect and admiration for the great job the BSD community is doing and hope in no way to communicate any disregaurd for everyones efforts. I don't suppose you have (communicated disregard, per se). However, those individuals who are sensitive to such matters *may* infer such from your dissatisfaction with the difficulties you've experienced. That's human nature; I doubt that many people who might "flame" you are really upset at you personally, either. In the Project's defense, I must point out that I have found no mail messages to this list asking for any help with these issues during the past two weeks. The individuals who answer questions here could help with the vast majority of these issues quite well, I think; and, it's likely they'll still be here when you do decide to try again... Right now I have to have Windows up and running also and am watching it go into a self destruct mode from somthing that it downloaded from the net all by it's self with no human operator touching it. There are so many Popups I had to pull the net cable just to stop it. They don't get no respect. This is the top problem with M$ machines that my company sees on a daily basis. It's called "swiss cheese security" If possible, use a firewall, and use alternate browsers and email programs; be sure that you've "Windows Update"d until you're up to date, and obtain both antivirus and spyware detection programs and keep them current as well Thank YouBill Gatlin You're welcome. I hope you'll be willing to try again soon, and if so, encourage you to follow the documentation carefully. If not, I wish you well with whatever you choose to use to power your computing experience. Kevin Kinsey DaleCo, S.P. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Sunday 09 January 2005 03:45 am, Erik Norgaard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > william gatlin wrote: > > I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and > > trying to get it to work. After figuring out how to get an ISO > > image, windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on > > modifying the file, I loaded it and got a lot of error code 1 > > messages that I never did figure out. I changed the partitioning > > and allowed 1/2 a gig for the root directory and loaded it again. > > > > All seemed to go well untill I tryed to configure the X.org > > windowing system. Nothing in /stand/sysinstall would do any > > configuration of X. Went to the net and got instructions. Finally > > got X to work and found vidtune. > > > > Kdm comes up with a log in screen which just leads to another log > > in screen. ctrl-alt-backspace won't turn x off as it keeps comming > > back on it's own. Nothing leads to a window manager other than the > > little one that comes with X. > > I sounds like you have started X by setting xdm on in /etc/ttys, I > would recommend you not to do that first time you start up X but > rather use startx. To get the console, press crtl-alt-F1, X is > normally on F9. > > To understand a bit about how X works: When X starts your session, it > will look for the file .xinitrc in your home directory and execute > the programs listed, if you have no .xinitrc the default system file > is used: /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xinit/xinitrc > > Usually only your windows manager is listed. Once the last program in > .xinitrc exists, X terminates your session. If you started X by > setting xdm on in /etc/ttys, X gives you a new login promt, otherwise > you will return to the console. > > So, it may not be X, but your window manager that is screwed, maybe > you have a core-dump file in your home directory - that would > indicate it. > > If you use startx instead and X crashes for whatever reason, you > should have some error output on the console you can post here on the > list. > > To see if it's your window manager, try a different one, I like > fluxbox because it's lightweight. gnome/kde are quite heavy. > > Just try this before you give up on FreeBSD. Here's my .xinitrc: % cat .xinitrc #exec startkde #exec fvwm #exec fvwm2 #exec gnome-session exec startxfce4 #exec icewm-session #exec openbox #exec fluxbox #exec enlightenment #exec wmaker #exec pwm #exec windowlab #exec evilwm Most of those aren't on my machine, but I've kept the startup commands there from earlier experimentation so I could easily start one if need be. I use xfce4 most of the time, but all you have to do is uncomment the line that references whatever wm or desktop you're using and comment the one you're not using, by putting a "#" in front of it, which means it won't be read. The list isn't not comprehensive, but for your purposes, you can also do this (not as root): % cd ~ (just to make sure you're in your home dir) % echo "exec startkde" > .xinitrc % chmod 755 .xinitrc % startx This assumes you have KDE installed, which from your earlier comments I'm guessing you do (if not, then that's another matter, but not hard to solve, though you can install whatever you want). You can change this by installing another desktop or wm and editing your .xinitrc - jt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 12:00 pm, Joshua Tinnin wrote:
> On Sunday 09 January 2005 05:28 am, Giorgos Keramidas
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 2005-01-09 16:53, william gatlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> wrote:
> > > I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and
> > > trying to get it to work. After figuring out how to get an ISO
> > > image, windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on
> > > modifying the file, I loaded it and got a lot of error code 1
> > > messages that I never did figure out. I changed the partitioning
> > > and allowed 1/2 a gig for the root directory and loaded it again.
> >
> > Netscape is acting silly. Avoid downloading ISO images with it. The
> > ISO images are available through FTP, so you can use any plain good
> > old FTP client[1] to get a copy of the images.
> >
> > [1] Even the command line "ftp" program that comes with Windows can
> > be used, if you feel like doing so.
>
> Personally, I think this is easier, especially because it will download
> the file without mangling it, and the commands are very intuitive and
> are common to all ftp servers. GUI ftp clients mostly just enter these
> same commands when you click the buttons.
>
> If you're using Win, first thing you should do is click on Start, then
> Run, then type in "cmd" (no quotes) and hit enter. The commands will be
> typed in that window. Sorry if this seems rudimentary, but it can't
> hurt to mention these things, especially if you're coming from Win.
>
> As the Win ftp client is/was (not sure anymore) essentially the freebsd
> ftp client (iirc the UC copyright is still in ftp.exe), you can use
> these commands on either one ("ftp>" and "%" are prompts and shouldn't
> be typed):
>
> % ftp ftp4.freebsd.org
>
> (this is a mirror close to me)
>
> You have to log in anonymously:
>
> Name (ftp4.freebsd.org:yourmachine): anonymous
> Password:
>
> (just hit enter)
>
> Then we should change directories remotely and locally, so we are
> downloading from the right place into the right place:
>
> ftp> cd /pub/FreeBSD/releases/i386/ISO-IMAGES/5.3
> ftp> lcd /path/to/download/dir
>
> (change the path in the second command to be your local download
> directory - in Win you might have to use backslashes to refer to a
> local path, such as
> C:\path\to\download\dir , but it's been a while)
>
> Now, download the two main install ISOs:
>
On a MS system you'll probably need to set the file mode to prevent
\n being translated to \r\n. It can be quite frustarating to realise
this only after hours of download :-
ftp> binary
> ftp> get 5.3-RELEASE-i386-disc1.iso
> ftp> get 5.3-RELEASE-i386-disc2.iso
>
> And, if you want:
>
> ftp> get 5.3-RELEASE-i386-bootonly.iso
> ftp> get 5.3-RELEASE-i386-miniinst.iso
>
> When it's all done downloading, type:
>
> ftp> bye
>
Malcolm
> "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Sunday 09 January 2005 12:53 am, "william gatlin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and > trying to get it to work. After figuring out how to get an ISO > image, windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on modifying > the file, I loaded it and got a lot of error code 1 messages that I > never did figure out. I changed the partitioning and allowed 1/2 a > gig for the root directory and loaded it again. > > All seemed to go well untill I tryed to configure the X.org windowing > system. Nothing in /stand/sysinstall would do any configuration of > X. Went to the net and got instructions. Finally got X to work and > found vidtune. > > Kdm comes up with a log in screen which just leads to another log in > screen. ctrl-alt-backspace won't turn x off as it keeps comming back > on it's own. Nothing leads to a window manager other than the little > one that comes with X. > > I re-downloaded the window managers from the net and hoped that would > fix it. It didn't. I'm sure that the trouble is in some little > config file somewhere or another but I just don't have the time as I > need a running system going. > > My opinion is that x.org isn't integrated quite well enough yet for > prime time. My BSD books don't have the new commands and other > information to be of any use and the Man pages that downloaded were > of no help either. Actually, you've touched on a problem not so much with X, but with integration of a graphics server with an OS. Windows and *nix approach this problem differently, but both solutions have problems, though with Windows it's more of a security risk (as it is with *nix, just not as much). However, X and xorg specifically has come quite a long way, and once you get it working you just leave it alone and forget about it. The main problem is that none of the autoconfig scripts do a very good job (hasn't changed much since XFree), but many people here can help with manual configuration, me included. If you need some help with something beyond what people have already suggested, then please feel free to ask. > So for now I'm going to try to load Slackware and hope that maybe in > a year BSD will be easier to wade through. I have to admit a bit of > sorrow in having to do this as I wanted them both on the same > machine. Slackware isn't really that different in how X is integrated. In fact, Slackware is one of the bare-bones type distros, "pure" Linux, as it were. > At the same time I wish to communicate my respect and admiration for > the great job the BSD community is doing and hope in no way to > communicate any disregaurd for everyones efforts. > > Right now I have to have Windows up and running also and am watching > it go into a self destruct mode from somthing that it downloaded from > the net all by it's self with no human operator touching it. There > are so many Popups I had to pull the net cable just to stop it. They > don't get no respect. > > It is my hope that the various Windows emulators will/are working > well enough to run some of my mission critical programs. Espesially > 'Trade Station' . I can't imagine having thousands of dollars riding > on Microsoft reliability. Well, not sure how committed you are to your decision, but I know for a fact that you can get much further along with configuring xorg and/or a wm or desktop if you want some help with it. Occasionally it will simply not work with some hardware, but that's not that common anymore, and it appears your hardware works. Some people have already given some suggestions, but trust me: Slackware isn't easier. You might be more comfortable with it, and that's fine, but if you can get that then you definitely can understand FreeBSD. Up to you. I use both, but FreeBSD is what's running most of the time. - jt ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Sunday 09 January 2005 05:28 am, Giorgos Keramidas
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2005-01-09 16:53, william gatlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and
> > trying to get it to work. After figuring out how to get an ISO
> > image, windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on
> > modifying the file, I loaded it and got a lot of error code 1
> > messages that I never did figure out. I changed the partitioning
> > and allowed 1/2 a gig for the root directory and loaded it again.
>
> Netscape is acting silly. Avoid downloading ISO images with it. The
> ISO images are available through FTP, so you can use any plain good
> old FTP client[1] to get a copy of the images.
>
> [1] Even the command line "ftp" program that comes with Windows can
> be used, if you feel like doing so.
Personally, I think this is easier, especially because it will download
the file without mangling it, and the commands are very intuitive and
are common to all ftp servers. GUI ftp clients mostly just enter these
same commands when you click the buttons.
If you're using Win, first thing you should do is click on Start, then
Run, then type in "cmd" (no quotes) and hit enter. The commands will be
typed in that window. Sorry if this seems rudimentary, but it can't
hurt to mention these things, especially if you're coming from Win.
As the Win ftp client is/was (not sure anymore) essentially the freebsd
ftp client (iirc the UC copyright is still in ftp.exe), you can use
these commands on either one ("ftp>" and "%" are prompts and shouldn't
be typed):
% ftp ftp4.freebsd.org
(this is a mirror close to me)
You have to log in anonymously:
Name (ftp4.freebsd.org:yourmachine): anonymous
Password:
(just hit enter)
Then we should change directories remotely and locally, so we are
downloading from the right place into the right place:
ftp> cd /pub/FreeBSD/releases/i386/ISO-IMAGES/5.3
ftp> lcd /path/to/download/dir
(change the path in the second command to be your local download
directory - in Win you might have to use backslashes to refer to a
local path, such as
C:\path\to\download\dir , but it's been a while)
Now, download the two main install ISOs:
ftp> get 5.3-RELEASE-i386-disc1.iso
ftp> get 5.3-RELEASE-i386-disc2.iso
And, if you want:
ftp> get 5.3-RELEASE-i386-bootonly.iso
ftp> get 5.3-RELEASE-i386-miniinst.iso
When it's all done downloading, type:
ftp> bye
There you go, and you can use this on any platform, as long as you can
enter commands to the ftp server directly. Once you do this once or
twice, you'll find it's so simple that you'll probably never use a GUI
ftp client again.
Of course, this doesn't solve the rest of your problems, but you might
be able to use this no matter what you decide to install.
- jt
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 06:17:36PM -0600, Scott Bennett wrote: > On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 08:54:55 -0600 Andrew L. Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > >Mac OSX is based upon FreeBSD and may have native versions of the > > Mac OSX was--and unless something has changed drastically in the last > few weeks, still is--based upon NextStep, another proprietary UNIX that was > based upon a Mach 2.4-2.5 kernel and 4.3BSD above that. >From http://developer.apple.com/unix/: Specifically, it is based in part on BSD 4.4 Lite. On a system level, many of the design decisions are made to align with BSD-style UNIX systems. Most libraries and utilities are from FreeBSD (http://www.freebsd.org/), but some are derived from NetBSD (http://www.netbsd.org/). For future development, Mac OS X has adopted FreeBSD as a reference code base for BSD technology. Work is ongoing to more closely synchronize all BSD tools and libraries with the FreeBSD-stable branch.. Your statements applied to the original OSX. It has shifted to 4.4BSD, Mach 3, and FBSD during the course of development, with lots of contributions from Net and OpenBSD. The changes didn't happen in the last few weeks. They happened continuously during the system's development. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Jan 9, 2005, at 6:17 PM, Scott Bennett wrote: On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 08:54:55 -0600 Andrew L. Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Mac OSX is based upon FreeBSD and may have native versions of the Mac OSX was--and unless something has changed drastically in the last few weeks, still is--based upon NextStep, another proprietary UNIX that was based upon a Mach 2.4-2.5 kernel and 4.3BSD above that. Thats a Linux fallacy, that the kernel makes the OS. Apple's collection of command line utilities we commonly think of as the Unix interface come from FreeBSD. As for what I've seen of the Darwin kernel, in grand BSD tradition Apple freely picked from here and there, whatever they thought best, and made what can only be said to be their own. applications you need. I talked my 11 year old nephew through an operating system upgrade (clean installation) of his ibook over the phone -- including wireless networking with WEP. Unfortunately, Apple has not released a version for Intel processors, so it won't help someone with a pee cee instead of a Mac. Wrong, its called Darwin. If you think FreeBSD is raw then go play with Darwin for a bit. Darwin is used for both i386 and PowerPC. MacOS X is Darwin plus the fantastic Apple GUI and other neat Apple stuff. -- David Kelly N4HHE, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Whom computers would destroy, they must first drive mad. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 08:54:55 -0600 Andrew L. Gould <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Mac OSX is based upon FreeBSD and may have native versions of the Mac OSX was--and unless something has changed drastically in the last few weeks, still is--based upon NextStep, another proprietary UNIX that was based upon a Mach 2.4-2.5 kernel and 4.3BSD above that. >applications you need. I talked my 11 year old nephew through an >operating system upgrade (clean installation) of his ibook over the >phone -- including wireless networking with WEP. > Unfortunately, Apple has not released a version for Intel processors, so it won't help someone with a pee cee instead of a Mac. Scott Bennett, Comm. ASMELG, CFIAG ** * Internet: bennett at cs.niu.edu * ** * "A well regulated and disciplined militia, is at all times a good * * objection to the introduction of that bane of all free governments * * -- a standing army." * *-- Gov. John Hancock, New York Journal, 28 January 1790 * ** ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: I quit
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Andrew L. Gould > Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 6:55 AM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Re: I quit > > > On Sunday 09 January 2005 02:53 am, william gatlin wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and > > trying to get it to work. After figuring out how to get an ISO > > image, windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on modifying > > the file, I loaded it and got a lot of error code 1 messages that I > > never did figure out. I changed the partitioning and allowed 1/2 a > > gig for the root directory and loaded it again. > > > > All seemed to go well untill I tryed to configure the X.org windowing > > system. Nothing in /stand/sysinstall would do any configuration of > > X. Went to the net and got instructions. Finally got X to work and > > found vidtune. > > > > Kdm comes up with a log in screen which just leads to another log in > > screen. ctrl-alt-backspace won't turn x off as it keeps comming back > > on it's own. Nothing leads to a window manager other than the little > > one that comes with X. > > > > I re-downloaded the window managers from the net and hoped that would > > fix it. It didn't. I'm sure that the trouble is in some little > > config file somewhere or another but I just don't have the time as I > > need a running system going. > > > > My opinion is that x.org isn't integrated quite well enough yet for > > prime time. My BSD books don't have the new commands and other > > information to be of any use and the Man pages that downloaded were > > of no help either. > > > > So for now I'm going to try to load Slackware and hope that maybe in > > a year BSD will be easier to wade through. I have to admit a bit of > > sorrow in having to do this as I wanted them both on the same > > machine. > > > > At the same time I wish to communicate my respect and admiration for > > the great job the BSD community is doing and hope in no way to > > communicate any disregaurd for everyones efforts. > > > > Right now I have to have Windows up and running also and am watching > > it go into a self destruct mode from somthing that it downloaded from > > the net all by it's self with no human operator touching it. There > > are so many Popups I had to pull the net cable just to stop it. They > > don't get no respect. > > > > It is my hope that the various Windows emulators will/are working > > well enough to run some of my mission critical programs. Espesially > > 'Trade Station' . I can't imagine having thousands of dollars riding > > on Microsoft reliability. > > > > Thank YouBill Gatlin > > "Prime Time", in it's truest sense, would suggest that FreeBSD is > targetted at a mass market -- it is not. The mass market is not > characterized, primarily, as thinkers. The FreeBSD user community > would be better described as system users and administrators who enjoy > technical aspects of computing; and who insist on controlling the > operating system. I'm not trying to insult you, or suggest that you're > not a thinker. I am trying to clear up any misconceptions about > FreeBSD. The "strengths" of MS Windows lead to its weaknesses. The > lack of those "strengths" in FreeBSD lead to a robust, stable operating > system; but require more work on the part of the user --> no "loose > nuts between the chair and the keyboard". (I can't remember where I > first heard that phrase.) > A couple misconceptions I would like to clear up (some I may have created): 1) FreeBSD isn't really targeted anywhere, because targeting implies there's a marketing department out there listening to customer feedback and telling the software developers what to write. It is liked by sysadmins mainly because sysadmins and developers work on it - but there really isn't anyone in the FreeBSD development group sitting around deliberately making FreeBSD difficult for the new user to use. 2) On request I can preconfigure a FreeBSD system for a business to be EXACTLY targeted to JUST what the business wants their employees to be running. So can any good FreeBSD admin. Thus, the possibility always exists that some 3rd party can come between the raw ISO's and a "mass market" end user and set it up for the mass market. Nothing in the OS exists that makes this impossible. The fact that many people have already done this with Linux somewhat precludes this from happening, though. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Sunday 09 January 2005 02:53 am, william gatlin wrote: > Hello, > > I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and > trying to get it to work. After figuring out how to get an ISO > image, windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on modifying > the file, I loaded it and got a lot of error code 1 messages that I > never did figure out. I changed the partitioning and allowed 1/2 a > gig for the root directory and loaded it again. > > All seemed to go well untill I tryed to configure the X.org windowing > system. Nothing in /stand/sysinstall would do any configuration of > X. Went to the net and got instructions. Finally got X to work and > found vidtune. > > Kdm comes up with a log in screen which just leads to another log in > screen. ctrl-alt-backspace won't turn x off as it keeps comming back > on it's own. Nothing leads to a window manager other than the little > one that comes with X. > > I re-downloaded the window managers from the net and hoped that would > fix it. It didn't. I'm sure that the trouble is in some little > config file somewhere or another but I just don't have the time as I > need a running system going. > > My opinion is that x.org isn't integrated quite well enough yet for > prime time. My BSD books don't have the new commands and other > information to be of any use and the Man pages that downloaded were > of no help either. > > So for now I'm going to try to load Slackware and hope that maybe in > a year BSD will be easier to wade through. I have to admit a bit of > sorrow in having to do this as I wanted them both on the same > machine. > > At the same time I wish to communicate my respect and admiration for > the great job the BSD community is doing and hope in no way to > communicate any disregaurd for everyones efforts. > > Right now I have to have Windows up and running also and am watching > it go into a self destruct mode from somthing that it downloaded from > the net all by it's self with no human operator touching it. There > are so many Popups I had to pull the net cable just to stop it. They > don't get no respect. > > It is my hope that the various Windows emulators will/are working > well enough to run some of my mission critical programs. Espesially > 'Trade Station' . I can't imagine having thousands of dollars riding > on Microsoft reliability. > > Thank YouBill Gatlin "Prime Time", in it's truest sense, would suggest that FreeBSD is targetted at a mass market -- it is not. The mass market is not characterized, primarily, as thinkers. The FreeBSD user community would be better described as system users and administrators who enjoy technical aspects of computing; and who insist on controlling the operating system. I'm not trying to insult you, or suggest that you're not a thinker. I am trying to clear up any misconceptions about FreeBSD. The "strengths" of MS Windows lead to its weaknesses. The lack of those "strengths" in FreeBSD lead to a robust, stable operating system; but require more work on the part of the user --> no "loose nuts between the chair and the keyboard". (I can't remember where I first heard that phrase.) If you're looking for an easy (effortless) Windows replacement, I would suggest either Mac OSX or Xandros Linux. Mac OSX is based upon FreeBSD and may have native versions of the applications you need. I talked my 11 year old nephew through an operating system upgrade (clean installation) of his ibook over the phone -- including wireless networking with WEP. Xandros Linux has an impressive installation process. Further, the Deluxe and Business versions come with CodeWeavers' CrossOver Office, which makes the installation of many Windows applications a breeze. See CodeWeavers' website for supported Windows applications: http://www.codeweavers.com/ Best of luck, Andrew Gould ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
The FreeBSD Handbook is priceless. A lot of effort is put into making it as complete and accurate as possible. The next time you decide to install FreeBSD as a newuser, i suggest you read through the handbook at least once. Remember: The FreeBSD Community and the Handbook Team, to be specific, have done all the hardwork for you so you just have to follow the instructions and smile at the end. -- ~michael ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On 2005-01-09 16:53, william gatlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and > trying to get it to work. After figuring out how to get an ISO image, > windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on modifying the > file, I loaded it and got a lot of error code 1 messages that I never > did figure out. I changed the partitioning and allowed 1/2 a gig for > the root directory and loaded it again. Netscape is acting silly. Avoid downloading ISO images with it. The ISO images are available through FTP, so you can use any plain good old FTP client[1] to get a copy of the images. [1] Even the command line "ftp" program that comes with Windows can be used, if you feel like doing so. You got past that though, so I assume you found a way to circumvent the Netscape bugs. The minimum size of the disk area you assign to FreeBSD depends on a lot of factors: the distribution you choose (base system parts), the extra packages you wish to install, the space you want to keep free for your own work, etc. For an X11 workstation, on which KDE or Gnome and/or a GUI development environment will be used, I recommend at least 8 GB these days. Disk space isn't so expensive anymore and having at least 3-4 GB of free space will allow > All seemed to go well untill I tryed to configure the X.org windowing > system. Nothing in /stand/sysinstall would do any configuration of X. > Went to the net and got instructions. Finally got X to work and found > vidtune. You should really, and I mean REALLY, print yourself a couple of the Handbook chapters before embarking on an installation. The instructions for installing FreeBSD, configuring it at post-install time, setting up X11, installing KDE or Gnome from the package collection, starting KDM and letting it fire up KDE instead of the plain but relatively archaic twm desktop, are all there. The absolutely _minimum_ set of chapters you should read and keep around while installing FreeBSD are: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/install.html http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ports.html http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/x11.html > Kdm comes up with a log in screen which just leads to another log in > screen. ctrl-alt-backspace won't turn x off as it keeps comming back > on it's own. Nothing leads to a window manager other than the little > one that comes with X. This is *EXACTLY* what kdm is supposed to do. It fires up X11 once for every 'session' you log into. > I re-downloaded the window managers from the net and hoped that would > fix it. It didn't. I'm sure that the trouble is in some little config > file somewhere or another but I just don't have the time as I need a > running system going. Downloading more stuff won't fix what you are using. Reading the documentation (i.e. the Handbook) will. Please do read it. Cheers, Giorgos ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
> I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and trying to > get it to work. After figuring out There are a couple of other possibilities, too. One is to try 4.10, which still has the old X11 configuration tools, and does not load Xorg. The other is xandros linux --- www.xandros.com. Smooth install, elegant desktop (OK, it's still KDE, but slimmed down). Don ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
On Sunday 09 January 2005 01:53 am, william gatlin wrote: > Hello, > > I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and trying to > get it to work. After figuring out > how to get an ISO image, windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on > modifying the file, I loaded it and > got a lot of error code 1 messages that I never did figure out. I changed > the partitioning and allowed 1/2 a gig > for the root directory and loaded it again. Remember when you first started using windows? It probably took you a good year to get a decent feel for how to use it. FreeBSD will be much quicker... we really do have a kick-ass support system. You can install into a partition that small, but it would be better to setup at least 3Gb and do a full install. This will allow you access to all the options, docs, man pages, ports, etc.. Seeing as how hard drives are very cheep now, it would be worth getting another one if you must keep windows and you don't have the space. The head aches you will save your self by installing everything on the FreeBSD cd will be worth the $50+ bucks you spend. As you get to know FreeBSD better you will have a better idea of what you don't want/need. You can install everything into one partition, though its recommended to make a few different partitions: For a full install this would be a decent guideline: / 200mb /var 200mb-500mb /usr2gb+ (anything new installed from ports or pkg_add will install into this /dir/ so give it all the space you can spare swap 2x the ram (NOTE: you can also make a swapfile (the handbook has a step-by-step on this, see below for handbook location) Also you might want to creat a seperate partition for /usr/home and /etc so if you ever need to do a full reinstall, all settings will be stored on these partitions. Another option is to just do backups of these directories if you don't want to mess with the partitions. > > All seemed to go well untill I tryed to configure the X.org windowing system. > Nothing in /stand/sysinstall would > do any configuration of X. Went to the net and got instructions. Finally > got X to work and found vidtune. > To configure xorg from the command line you'll want to use: xorgcfg > Kdm comes up with a log in screen which just leads to another log in screen. > ctrl-alt-backspace won't turn x off > as it keeps comming back on it's own. Nothing leads to a window manager > other than the little one that comes with > X. > > I re-downloaded the window managers from the net and hoped that would fix it. > It didn't. I'm sure that the trouble > is in some little config file somewhere or another but I just don't have the > time as I need a running system > going. Most config files (%90+) are in 3 places: /etc/ (network wide config) /usr/local/etc/ (local system config) /usr/home/username/ (user specific stuff) The file you want is: /etc/ttys is the file Find a line like this and make sure its says "off" and not "on" ttyv8 "/usr/X11R6/bin/kdm -nodaemon" xterm on secure This will disable kdm and you will get a console login prompt after the system boots. After logining in to the console you can start xorg up with the command: startx For this to work you will need to add a line to /usr/home/username/.xinitrc ( ~/.xinitrc for short ) or you will get the default window manager. For kde add this to ~/.xinitrc: startkde Quick way to write this to the file: echo startkde > ~/.xinitrc If you don't have a desktop installed yet you will need to install it (sounds like you do if you have kdm starting up). as root do: pkg_add -r kde3 or cd /usr/ports/x11/kde3 make install clean The second option will take a long time (1-3 days) as it will download the source for everything and compile it! This is also assuming that you have a connection established to the internet. It sounded like you do. > My opinion is that x.org isn't integrated quite well enough yet for prime > time. My BSD books don't have the new > commands and other information to be of any use and the Man pages that > downloaded were of no help either. The man pages should have been installed when you installed the system, no need to download anything. man man The handbook is probably the best source of info if you want something that is a little easier to read, as manpages don't have a good index as of yet. If you installed it, it will be in: /usr/share/doc/handbook You will need a web browser as it is in html format, if you don't have xorg up and running, install lynx or links. They are command line web browsers. You will find them in the ports or you can: pkg_add -r lynx pkg_add -r links Then: cd /usr/share/doc/handbook man lynx lynx ./index.html You can also access the handbook from a link on: http://www.freebsd.org/ or directly from this email at: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/in
RE: I quit
> The ISO images that you download over the Internet are for techies > who WANT to learn how the system really works "underneith". They > LIKE IT when things break down because how do you learn anything > if you don't have to fix a few problems? I can definitely see this. I run five or six small servers at home to provide a few services for the house and friends nearby. They run a mixture of Open+FreeBSD. I spent a good week taking the system apart, removing things, tweaking scripts etc. On the eigth day, they were all running nicely and locked up tighter than a ducks arse. I was left twiddling my thumbs. I contemplated logging into a few of them and typing random commands as root so I might have something to fix. I suggest you run your machine with a precariously balanaced glass of orange juice on it at all times. It will lessen the chances of you being afflicted with this terrible, and above all, dull, syndrome. 0.02 sterling Mark ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
william gatlin wrote: I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and trying to get it to work. After figuring out how to get an ISO image, windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on modifying the file, I loaded it and got a lot of error code 1 messages that I never did figure out. I changed the partitioning and allowed 1/2 a gig for the root directory and loaded it again. All seemed to go well untill I tryed to configure the X.org windowing system. Nothing in /stand/sysinstall would do any configuration of X. Went to the net and got instructions. Finally got X to work and found vidtune. Kdm comes up with a log in screen which just leads to another log in screen. ctrl-alt-backspace won't turn x off as it keeps comming back on it's own. Nothing leads to a window manager other than the little one that comes with X. I sounds like you have started X by setting xdm on in /etc/ttys, I would recommend you not to do that first time you start up X but rather use startx. To get the console, press crtl-alt-F1, X is normally on F9. To understand a bit about how X works: When X starts your session, it will look for the file .xinitrc in your home directory and execute the programs listed, if you have no .xinitrc the default system file is used: /usr/X11R6/lib/X11/xinit/xinitrc Usually only your windows manager is listed. Once the last program in .xinitrc exists, X terminates your session. If you started X by setting xdm on in /etc/ttys, X gives you a new login promt, otherwise you will return to the console. So, it may not be X, but your window manager that is screwed, maybe you have a core-dump file in your home directory - that would indicate it. If you use startx instead and X crashes for whatever reason, you should have some error output on the console you can post here on the list. To see if it's your window manager, try a different one, I like fluxbox because it's lightweight. gnome/kde are quite heavy. Just try this before you give up on FreeBSD. Cheers, Erik -- Ph: +34.666334818 web: www.locolomo.org S/MIME Certificate: http://www.locolomo.org/crt/2004071206.crt Subject ID: A9:76:7A:ED:06:95:2B:8D:48:97:CE:F2:3F:42:C8:F2:22:DE:4C:B9 Fingerprint: 4A:E8:63:38:46:F6:9A:5D:B4:DC:29:41:3F:62:D3:0A:73:25:67:C2 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
RE: I quit
> -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of william gatlin > Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2005 12:54 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: I quit > > > Hello, > > I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 > and trying to get it to work. > > My opinion is that x.org isn't integrated quite well enough yet > for prime time. My BSD books don't have the new > commands and other information to be of any use and the Man pages > that downloaded were of no help either. > Your problem is your under the mistaken assumption that you are supposed to be downloading ISOs and such in order to get a non-Windows desktop. Probably your not an IT professional and coming at this from an end user perspective. If that is the case then you want to quit fooling around with downloading FreeBSD or Slackware or some baloney like that, and go oout and BUY something like a Dell Precision n series 1 workstation with Red Hat Linux preloaded on it. $959, a great deal. Or, if your a cloner, go to your local chop-shop and buy one of their Linux preloads. Fry's Electronics even sells cheap ones of these for about $200 on sale at times. THOSE are the non-Windows, non-Apple solutions that the computer industry has created for people like you and believe me, they are VERY 'ready for prime time' If you find this insulting I would suggest you consider that your last machine you bought undoubtedly came with MS Windows preloaded on it - are you insulted by that? The ISO images that you download over the Internet are for techies who WANT to learn how the system really works "underneith". They LIKE IT when things break down because how do you learn anything if you don't have to fix a few problems? They are NOT for people who just want a solid reliable system so they can run "Trade Station". For people like you who want to do that, you are supposed to purchase your computer with Linux preloaded on it - Microsoft would say exactly the same thing, although they would say to buy a machine with Windows preloaded on it. > > Right now I have to have Windows up and running also and am > watching it go into a self destruct mode from somthing > that it downloaded from the net all by it's self with no human > operator touching it. There are so many Popups I > had to pull the net cable just to stop it. They don't get no respect. > > It is my hope that the various Windows emulators will/are working > well enough to run some of my mission critical > programs. Espesially 'Trade Station' . I can't imagine having > thousands of dollars riding on Microsoft > reliability. > http://www.vmware.com/download/ VMware Workstation 4.5 Download the eval and find out. If it works you purchase it and get support. Even better than the real Windows where you purchase it and don't get support - you have to keep purchasing that in addition, too. Ted ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: I quit
Hi Bill: Sorry you had such a miserable time with this. You may want to get either of these two books, as helps in installing and configuring FreeBSD. FreeBSD: An Open-Source Operating System for Your Personal Computer, by Annelise Anderson Absolute BSD: The Ultimate Guide to FreeBSD by Michael Lucas and Jordan Hubbard On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 16:53:46 +0800, william gatlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and trying to > get it to work. After figuring out > how to get an ISO image, windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on > modifying the file, I loaded it and ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
I quit
Hello, I have spent at least two weeks of my free time downloading 5.3 and trying to get it to work. After figuring out how to get an ISO image, windows couldn't do it because netscape insisted on modifying the file, I loaded it and got a lot of error code 1 messages that I never did figure out. I changed the partitioning and allowed 1/2 a gig for the root directory and loaded it again. All seemed to go well untill I tryed to configure the X.org windowing system. Nothing in /stand/sysinstall would do any configuration of X. Went to the net and got instructions. Finally got X to work and found vidtune. Kdm comes up with a log in screen which just leads to another log in screen. ctrl-alt-backspace won't turn x off as it keeps comming back on it's own. Nothing leads to a window manager other than the little one that comes with X. I re-downloaded the window managers from the net and hoped that would fix it. It didn't. I'm sure that the trouble is in some little config file somewhere or another but I just don't have the time as I need a running system going. My opinion is that x.org isn't integrated quite well enough yet for prime time. My BSD books don't have the new commands and other information to be of any use and the Man pages that downloaded were of no help either. So for now I'm going to try to load Slackware and hope that maybe in a year BSD will be easier to wade through. I have to admit a bit of sorrow in having to do this as I wanted them both on the same machine. At the same time I wish to communicate my respect and admiration for the great job the BSD community is doing and hope in no way to communicate any disregaurd for everyones efforts. Right now I have to have Windows up and running also and am watching it go into a self destruct mode from somthing that it downloaded from the net all by it's self with no human operator touching it. There are so many Popups I had to pull the net cable just to stop it. They don't get no respect. It is my hope that the various Windows emulators will/are working well enough to run some of my mission critical programs. Espesially 'Trade Station' . I can't imagine having thousands of dollars riding on Microsoft reliability. Thank YouBill Gatlin -- __ Check out the latest SMS services @ http://www.linuxmail.org This allows you to send and receive SMS through your mailbox. Powered by Outblaze ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
