Re: [vox-tech] Wine and HW access?

[Peter Jay Salzman]

begin Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Tuesday 16 July 2002 11:28 pm, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
> > > Anyway, can Wine intercept access to the printer port and support it as
> > > VMware does?
> >
> > wine boasts parallel port access too.  transgaming (winex) has it turned
> > off by default for some reason.  if you use winex,
> 
> Yeah, I've bought 3 month pre-paid subscriptions twice, primarily to avoid 
> having to configure wine myself.
 
yeah.  even if you don't play any games, winex is *worth* 5 bucks a
month because:

a) it's a worthy cause
b) it *really* dumbs down configuring wine.  i'm happy being dumb about
   wine.  :)

> >you'll have to
> > download the cvs version and compile it yourself.  at least, that's what
> > was explained to me (i had posted a question of printer access under
> > winex).
> 
> Arg But that will not have support for some of the copy protection and 
> other closed source bits of WineX.
 
yeah, that's a good point.

tell you what.  the guy who answered my question wasn't REALLY clear
about it.  maybe you can glean some info which i glossed over.

i had posted a message about the "cd stomper pro".  i was able to design
CD jewel case covers and CD artwork, but i couldn't get it to print.  i
posted a message in one of the forums about it, and got one or two
responses.   it should still be there.  i don't remember what their
search utility is like, but hopefully they'll have something which will
allow you to find my post and peoples' responses.

look for +cd +stomp +printer in the support forum.  it was about 
h. 3-6 months ago.

let me know about your progress.  i'm interested.

pete



msg03169/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [vox-tech] Wine and HW access?

[Ryan]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On Tuesday 16 July 2002 11:28 pm, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:
> that's very impressive.  note that one of the selling points of vmware
> is that it handles calls to serial and || port.  it also has limited usb
> too.

I wasn't aware of that. I did notice the the serial/parallel stuff when 
setting it up, but didn't know how well it worked.

> > Anyway, can Wine intercept access to the printer port and support it as
> > VMware does?
>
> wine boasts parallel port access too.  transgaming (winex) has it turned
> off by default for some reason.  if you use winex,

Yeah, I've bought 3 month pre-paid subscriptions twice, primarily to avoid 
having to configure wine myself.

>you'll have to
> download the cvs version and compile it yourself.  at least, that's what
> was explained to me (i had posted a question of printer access under
> winex).

Arg But that will not have support for some of the copy protection and 
other closed source bits of WineX.

- -- 
Win98 is called Win98 because after the system crashed 98 times, you have to
reinstall.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9NRNwEd9E83IXe8cRAhzyAJ0czn+El+0RLWTheM98gQb72XLISwCcCodU
NLVqccPNq25RoUQRP3QTghM=
=t9Rz
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

Re: [vox-tech] Wine and HW access?

[Peter Jay Salzman]

begin Ryan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> 
> Last night I was looking for a manual for my Radio Shack 15-1994 Universal 
> Remote. I found one, but also found something else. This thing has a 'JP1 
> interface' for programming. Apparently someone figured out how to talk to the 
> thing and hook it up to a PC. I just spent $6 at Radio Shack and spent half 
> an hour building the parralel inteface. I fired up VMware, created a virtual 
> LPT1 that talks to the remote using /dev/parport0 and IT WORKS!
> 
 
that's very impressive.  note that one of the selling points of vmware
is that it handles calls to serial and || port.  it also has limited usb
too.

> Anyway, can Wine intercept access to the printer port and support it as 
> VMware does?
 
wine boasts parallel port access too.  transgaming (winex) has it turned
off by default for some reason.  if you use winex, you'll have to
download the cvs version and compile it yourself.  at least, that's what
was explained to me (i had posted a question of printer access under
winex).

pete

-- 
GPG Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E  70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D
___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

[vox-tech] Wine and HW access?

[Ryan]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


Last night I was looking for a manual for my Radio Shack 15-1994 Universal 
Remote. I found one, but also found something else. This thing has a 'JP1 
interface' for programming. Apparently someone figured out how to talk to the 
thing and hook it up to a PC. I just spent $6 at Radio Shack and spent half 
an hour building the parralel inteface. I fired up VMware, created a virtual 
LPT1 that talks to the remote using /dev/parport0 and IT WORKS!


Anyway, can Wine intercept access to the printer port and support it as 
VMware does?

- -- 
If Microsoft built cars, If you were involved in a crash, you would have
no idea what happened.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9NQc2Ed9E83IXe8cRAp1pAJ9mcjnZp6aPdoL8j9JTXPvVbBZ5LQCfRzlI
wny7M1pG8AtDIbWT5+Pzt/Q=
=EbPI
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

[vox-tech] dyanamic memory panacea

[Micah Cowan]

Micah Cowan writes:
 > If you're curious, the one conformant C99 implementation is available
 > on Linux. It is not Free, however - either as in beer or speech. I
 > don't own it, but have a good deal of respect for the developer, and
 > have often considered it. Also, the web site gives you a free trial
 > run of their software - only checks for syntax errors, though: it
 > won't actually compile or run software.

Stoopid me, forgetting the link. Here:

  http://www.comeaucomputing.com

-Micah
___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

[vox-tech] dyanamic memory panacea

[Micah Cowan]

Peter Jay Salzman writes:
 > ok, not a panacea, but pretty cool nevertheless...
 > 
 > i was doing some reading and found a function alloca() which allocates
 > dynamic memory like malloc() and friends, but it gets memory from the
 > current stack frame instead of the heap.
 > 
 > the obvious advantage is that the memory is deallocated once the stack
 > frame is popped.  in other words, when the function returns, all memory
 > allocated by alloca is freed.  this means no memory leaks.  very cool.
 > 
 > however, in the man page, under BUGS, it says:
 > 
 > BUGS
 >The alloca function is machine dependent.
 > 
 > this doesn't say anything to me.  what does it mean for a function to be
 > machine dependent?   does it behave differently across different
 > machine architectures?  does code compiled on one x86 machine not run on
 > another x86 machine?
 > 
 > what exactly is the man page warning me about?

Jeff gave the appropriate answer here; however, it's worth pointing
out that alloca() is not standard - either to C or POSIX (or any other
standard to my knowledge); so there's no guarantee you can use it in
other environments. In practice, it is a fairly common UNIX extension,
however.

The latest C standard (C99) has addressed most of the uses which make
alloca() convenient through the use of "compound literals". This
facility allows you to specify a struct or array literal, which is
freed when it goes out of scope. It has been supported (though not
fully) for some time in GCC; you can read about it in GCC's info page,
under C Extensions: Compound Literals.

However, there is only one implementation currently in existence that
supports the C99 standard - and GCC isn't it (still a rather far cry
from compliance, actually). So, using this construct isn't portable
across a variety of other platforms, either. However, there is at
least the fact that it is in the C standard, and will be implemented
in all modern C implementations at some time in the near future -
alloca() still shows no signs of standardization (e.g., it's not in
the current POSIX draft).

For my part, I don't use either one, until more conformant C99
implementations are abundant.

If you're curious, the one conformant C99 implementation is available
on Linux. It is not Free, however - either as in beer or speech. I
don't own it, but have a good deal of respect for the developer, and
have often considered it. Also, the web site gives you a free trial
run of their software - only checks for syntax errors, though: it
won't actually compile or run software.

-Micah

___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

Re: [vox-tech] Help Request with SAMBA and SWAT

[Peter Jay Salzman]

doug, don't apologize.

even if it's not the answer (which i'm betting it is), it's an EXCELLENT
answer.  kudos to you; i should've thought of that!

pete

begin Doug Huckaba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> OK, I avoided answering this post becasue I don't have all the details,
> but... I remember trying to use SWAT under Redhat (5.2 or 6.1 I think) and
> there was a commnented out field in the inetd.conf that had to do with
> SWAT. Basically (according to my poor excuse for a memory) SWAT ran it's
> own web "server".  The inetd entry (which was commented out by default for
> security reasons) called a specific command that returned the SWAT
> interface to the client browser. It had nothing to do with gnome or
> apache.
> 
> I'm sorry that's not a very detailed answer and with my current workload I 
> can't research further right now. If I can find some time next week, I'll 
> reply with more details.
> 
> Back then, I found that Swat would hose up my smb.conf pretty bad, so I 
> stopped using it (after I lost a few hours of configuration). I suggest 
> being very careful and making backup's of the smb.conf before using.
> 
> -doug
___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

Re: [vox-tech] Help Request with SAMBA and SWAT

[Doug Huckaba]

OK, I avoided answering this post becasue I don't have all the details,
but... I remember trying to use SWAT under Redhat (5.2 or 6.1 I think) and
there was a commnented out field in the inetd.conf that had to do with
SWAT. Basically (according to my poor excuse for a memory) SWAT ran it's
own web "server".  The inetd entry (which was commented out by default for
security reasons) called a specific command that returned the SWAT
interface to the client browser. It had nothing to do with gnome or
apache.

I'm sorry that's not a very detailed answer and with my current workload I 
can't research further right now. If I can find some time next week, I'll 
reply with more details.

Back then, I found that Swat would hose up my smb.conf pretty bad, so I 
stopped using it (after I lost a few hours of configuration). I suggest 
being very careful and making backup's of the smb.conf before using.

-doug


-- 

Today, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:

> begin Henry House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> > On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 11:57:52PM -0700, Dick Ely using JPS-SMTP & POP wrote:
> > [...]
> > > SWAT simply hangs when I try to run it and when I try to log on  to 
> > > //localhost:901using gnome   I get *connection refused*.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > First:  Why cannot I log on to //localhost:901 using gnome?
> > 
> > This error likely means that there is no web server installed on your
> > computer. Try, in a terminal window:
> > 
> > dpkg -l | less
> > dpkg -l | egrep 'apache|httpd'
> > 
> > to see if a webserver is installed. The first command shows you all installed
> > packages, the second scans for names containing 'apache' or 'httpd'.
>  
> you also might want to do a grep -i khttp /proc/ksyms.;-)
> 
> pete
> 
> 


___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

[vox-tech] Maxtor Ultra ATA/133 PCI Adapter Card (K01PCAT133)

[Doug Huckaba]

Does anybody out there have any experience with this card? The box I'm 
planning on putting this in has:

ASUS P5AB
VIA Apollo VP3 chipset (VT82C597) (onboard ide bus = ata/66)
AMD K6 500
Kernel 2.4.18 (debian woody, custom kernel)

I haven't decided which drives (besides the new WD 40G) will plug in, but 
the newest are only ata/100.

I can't figure out what chipset the new controller card is running or what
kernel driver will apply. I have done some google searches & RTFM'd the
kernel drivers but all I can determine is that the older ATA/100 card uses 
the
promise drivers, but I'm unsure if Maxtor switched contoller chips for
this line.

I purchased this on a whim while getting a new drive, but haven't opened
the box so that the return process might go a little smoother.

Unfortuantly the maxtor support site seems to think that nobody would ever
need this info because there is no mention of the tech specs.

Any insight is appriciated...


-doug
-- 


___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

Re: [vox-tech] Help Request with SAMBA and SWAT

[Henry House]

On Tue, Jul 16, 2002 at 04:16:45PM -0700, Dick Ely wrote:
> Thank you Henry and Peter and others on the SAmba shuffle.  
> 
> 
> I tried  
> 
> dpkg -l | egrep 'apache|httpd'
> 
> and came up with nil and recall that during the install I chose not to 
> install a server!  What would one want that for???
> 
> OK, no SWAT without a server.  Perhaps I will put one in at the  Sunday 
> installfest.
> 
> Or how would I do that in my little nest at home.

Assuming that you have either Debian installation media or a working net
connection for download, the command 'apt-get install apache' should be
sufficient to get you a working server.

-- 
Henry House
The attached file is a digital signature. See 
for information.  My OpenPGP key: .



msg03160/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [vox-tech] Help Request with SAMBA and SWAT

[Dick Ely]

Thank you Henry and Peter and others on the SAmba shuffle.  


I tried  

dpkg -l | egrep 'apache|httpd'

and came up with nil and recall that during the install I chose not to 
install a server!  What would one want that for???

OK, no SWAT without a server.  Perhaps I will put one in at the  Sunday 
installfest.

Or how would I do that in my little nest at home.

 I will also visit with Roseville at their Samba fest on Saturday.  I am 
down to mastering the smb.conf  files.


I have several networked win boxes.  I would like to share files both ways.
I have printers and plotters on all the different machines, I would like 
to share some of those including a HP1600 jetdirect printer that is 
networked in.  

Thanks for the help.  

Dick Ely
 







Peter Jay Salzman wrote:

>begin Henry House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
>
>>On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 11:57:52PM -0700, Dick Ely using JPS-SMTP & POP wrote:
>>[...]
>>
>>>SWAT simply hangs when I try to run it and when I try to log on  to 
>>>//localhost:901using gnome   I get *connection refused*.
>>>
>>>
>>>First:  Why cannot I log on to //localhost:901 using gnome?
>>>
>>This error likely means that there is no web server installed on your
>>computer. Try, in a terminal window:
>>
>>  dpkg -l | less
>>  dpkg -l | egrep 'apache|httpd'
>>
>>to see if a webserver is installed. The first command shows you all installed
>>packages, the second scans for names containing 'apache' or 'httpd'.
>>
> 
>you also might want to do a grep -i khttp /proc/ksyms.;-)
>
>pete
>


___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

Re: [vox-tech] dyanamic memory panacea

[Jeff Newmiller]

On Tue, 16 Jul 2002, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:

> ok, not a panacea, but pretty cool nevertheless...
> 
> i was doing some reading and found a function alloca() which allocates
> dynamic memory like malloc() and friends, but it gets memory from the
> current stack frame instead of the heap.
> 
> the obvious advantage is that the memory is deallocated once the stack
> frame is popped.  in other words, when the function returns, all memory
> allocated by alloca is freed.  this means no memory leaks.  very cool.
> 
> however, in the man page, under BUGS, it says:
> 
> BUGS
>The alloca function is machine dependent.
> 
> this doesn't say anything to me.  what does it mean for a function to be
> machine dependent?   does it behave differently across different
> machine architectures?  does code compiled on one x86 machine not run on
> another x86 machine?
> 
> what exactly is the man page warning me about?

Stack implementation in general is dependent on the hardware.  Some stacks
go from low memory to high memory. There are sometimes limited facilities
for manipulating stack pointers, so assembly language tricks of varying
levels of sophistication are always needed to implement alloca. (Similar
tricks are required for setjmp/longjmp.) Some stacks have limited ability
to expand... and this is probably the most critical hardware-specific
concern.

The warning is simply that there is no portability guarantee for this
function, and no guarantee that it can even be implemented on all
architectures, current or future.  I think it would be difficult for the
x86 architecture to evolve in a direction that would make implementing it
impossible, though, and I can't think of any hardware that a Un*x-ish OS
would run on that couldn't implement this function. 

Personally, I doubt I would find much use for it, though.  I am
uncomfortable allocating an input-determined amount of memory on the
stack.

---
Jeff NewmillerThe .   .  Go Live...
DCN:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Basics: ##.#.   ##.#.  Live Go...
  Live:   OO#.. Dead: OO#..  Playing
Research Engineer (Solar/BatteriesO.O#.   #.O#.  with
/Software/Embedded Controllers)   .OO#.   .OO#.  rocks...2k
---

___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech

Re: [vox-tech] Help Request with SAMBA and SWAT

[Peter Jay Salzman]

begin Henry House <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> On Sun, Jul 14, 2002 at 11:57:52PM -0700, Dick Ely using JPS-SMTP & POP wrote:
> [...]
> > SWAT simply hangs when I try to run it and when I try to log on  to 
> > //localhost:901using gnome   I get *connection refused*.
> > 
> > 
> > First:  Why cannot I log on to //localhost:901 using gnome?
> 
> This error likely means that there is no web server installed on your
> computer. Try, in a terminal window:
> 
>   dpkg -l | less
>   dpkg -l | egrep 'apache|httpd'
> 
> to see if a webserver is installed. The first command shows you all installed
> packages, the second scans for names containing 'apache' or 'httpd'.
 
you also might want to do a grep -i khttp /proc/ksyms.;-)

pete

-- 
GPG Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E  70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D



msg03157/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature

[vox-tech] dyanamic memory panacea

[Peter Jay Salzman]

ok, not a panacea, but pretty cool nevertheless...

i was doing some reading and found a function alloca() which allocates
dynamic memory like malloc() and friends, but it gets memory from the
current stack frame instead of the heap.

the obvious advantage is that the memory is deallocated once the stack
frame is popped.  in other words, when the function returns, all memory
allocated by alloca is freed.  this means no memory leaks.  very cool.

however, in the man page, under BUGS, it says:

BUGS
   The alloca function is machine dependent.

this doesn't say anything to me.  what does it mean for a function to be
machine dependent?   does it behave differently across different
machine architectures?  does code compiled on one x86 machine not run on
another x86 machine?

what exactly is the man page warning me about?

pete

-- 
GPG Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E  70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D
___
vox-tech mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.lugod.org/mailman/listinfo/vox-tech