[GNHLUG] [DLSLUG-Announce] DLSLUG Monthly Meeting 2012-04-05

Next Meeting Thursday Apr 5, 2012 A program of nifties and chat Dartmouth College Carson 060 5:30 Pre-meeting dinner at Everything But Anchovies. That's a pizza joint on Allen Street by the Dartmouth Bookstore. RSVP and bring cash. 7:00 Sign-in, networking 7:1

EMACS - enabling at spi2 support

Does anyone know how to enable at-spi2 support in emacs? My understanding is that it doesn't automatically kick in when you start EMACS, but that there is a module you can load, and that the module is included with the program or available on the debian / ubuntu packaging. So far I've downloaded

Re: EMACS - enabling at spi2 support

I don't know anything about at-spi2, but... The 'apropos' command within emacs is useful for poking around as is the info manuals (C-h i). You won't see any el files unless you install emacs32-el and you don't need that unless you are curious. The compiled versions will on your system, so look f

Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

Okay, because I think that Ubuntu 10.10 with Compiz, the cube, wobbly windows and Gnome 2.x is the epitome of the Linux experience, I've given up on more recent stuff, and installed 10.10 -- 32-bit -- on my laptop. But I'm a total btrfs whore, so I installed that (aside from my /boot partition).

Re: EMACS - enabling at spi2 support

Susan Cragin writes: > Does anyone know how to enable at-spi2 support in emacs? Obviously, I think that you are smart enough to find atspi.el here: http://delysid.org/atspi.el ...and of course the comments in the elisp code list some dependencies. After you'll pulled down everything and in

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

It'd take some pretty bizarre build errors to generate a kernel that describes itself as x86_64 when it isn't. Therefore, (assuming you're really running in the filesystem that your x86 system was based on) what's likely happening is that the exec() machinery that allows mixed use of x86 and x86

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

On 04/05/2012 09:20 AM, Ken D'Ambrosio wrote: > But... i386 seems to be missing as a possible architecture. The closest I > could find was x86. But this concerned me, because x86_64's bzImage is a soft > link to x86's. Anyway, "What the hell," I thought, and compiled it. > Installed > it. Boo

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

Brian: I'm gonna pull the whole repo. I really like btrfs, and anything pre-10.10 isn't recent enough to support it for an installation. And I ain't doing 12.04 because, well, it ain't the epitome of the Linux user experience. ;-) On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 10:29:23 -0400 "Michael ODonnell" wrote >

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

I've been 64bit forawhile. What does 32bit do that 64 won't? Besides browser plugins, though that's gotten beter too. I installed 11.10 and then installed lxde and lubuntu over it so I didn't have to learn Unity. There is also xubuntu. In my case I was debian 6.0x on the server and wanted a ne

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

"Brian St. Pierre" writes: > > On 04/05/2012 09:20 AM, Ken D'Ambrosio wrote: > > But... i386 seems to be missing as a possible architecture. The closest I > > could find was x86. But this concerned me, because x86_64's bzImage is a > > soft > > link to x86's. Anyway, "What the hell," I thought

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

"Ken D'Ambrosio" writes: > > Brian: I'm gonna pull the whole repo. I really like btrfs, and anything > pre-10.10 isn't recent enough to support it for an installation. And I ain't > doing 12.04 because, well, it ain't the epitome of the Linux user experience. > ;-) Ken, Have you considered upg

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

>On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 10:29:23 -0400 "Michael ODonnell" > wrote > >> BTW, for recent kernel sources I think the value you wanted to >> use for ARCH is i686 rather than i386, even though the latter >> may be what the "arch" command reports. > >Well... here's my /usr/src/linux/arch directory:

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:40:35 -0400 Joshua Judson Rosen wrote > Have you considered upgrading to Debian 6.0/Squeeze? It really sounds > more like what you want...: > > http://www.debian.org/News/2011/20110205a > > I use the same Compiz/GNOME setup as you're describing. I don't use btrfs, > b

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

> What does 32bit do that 64 won't? Besides browser plugins, > though that's gotten beter too. Lack of 64bit browser plugins (particularly Flash) is a big deal for some. Adobe's official stance on the matter has been all over the map (I don't know whether their problem is technical or politica

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 13:01:02 -0400 "Michael ODonnell" > >Well... here's my /usr/src/linux/arch directory: > [...] > >avr32 frvKconfig mipspowerpc sparc x86 > > > Wooops! dainbramage... I meant to say that my arch command > reports i686 but (as you've indicated) that's n

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

> but they've heavily favored the 32bit version and seem either > unable or unwilling to produce and support a stable 64bit plugin. I meant to say "...to *consistently* produce..." In fairness, the 64bit Flash plugin I have running with Firefox right now has actually been quite stable, especial

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

The '60s vintage CDC machines like the 3600 & 6500 used 48 bit OSs. Mike Miller Thu, 2012-04-05 at 12:25 -0400, Joshua Judson Rosen wrote: > "Brian St. Pierre" writes: > > > > On 04/05/2012 09:20 AM, Ken D'Ambrosio wrote: > > > But... i386 seems to be missing as a possible architecture. The

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Michael ODonnell < michael.odonn...@comcast.net> wrote: > > The most recent announcement from them that I'm > aware of is that they (once again) plan to abandon the 64bit > version altogether. They're actually only providing limited security fix releases of Flash

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

> In the meantime... is there any possible downside of having > a 64-bit kernel in a 32-bit userspace? Everything -- drivers, > camera, apps -- seems just ducky. I've seen instances where 32bit apps and libraries disagreed with some 64bit drivers about the layout of the data structures that ge

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

"Ken D'Ambrosio" writes: > > On Thu, 05 Apr 2012 12:40:35 -0400 Joshua Judson Rosen > wrote > > > Have you considered upgrading to Debian 6.0/Squeeze? It really sounds > > more like what you want...: > > > > http://www.debian.org/News/2011/20110205a > > > > I use the same Compiz/GNOME setu

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

On 04/05/2012 02:39 PM, Michael ODonnell wrote: >> In the meantime... is there any possible downside of having >> a 64-bit kernel in a 32-bit userspace? Everything -- drivers, >> camera, apps -- seems just ducky. > I've seen instances where 32bit apps and libraries disagreed > with some 64bit dri

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Joshua Judson Rosen wrote: > You think you're joking, but it worked for ATM: > >     ATM didn't work for ATM. -- Ben ___ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-dis

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

> I have seen that in 64-bit Linux, 32-bit processes tend to execute > a bit faster. I've seen a number of cases where 32-bit apps run > faster than their 64-bit version, but I've also seen 64-bit apps > run faster than their 32-bit versions. The 1g/3g memory split I mentioned allowed the ker

Re: Am I 32-bit, or 64-bit?

Ben Scott writes: > > On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 12:25 PM, Joshua Judson Rosen > wrote: > > You think you're joking, but it worked for ATM: > > > >     > > ATM didn't work for ATM. I do note that it's the only non-joke example listed in Wik