On Mon, 2 Jul 2001, Jesse Pollard wrote:
> Better re-read the fine print on the "fair-use" statement. BOTH DSL
> and Cable, or dialup (New Orleans at least) will disconnect you if you
> run ANY unattended operation (if they determine it IS unattended). No
This would take a lot of watching on the
On Sun, 1 Jul 2001, Ben Ford wrote:
> This seems to be meant as a joke, but I don't think it's all that unlikely.
>
> I seem to recall that MS products cannot be used in aircraft control
> rooms for this reason.
It's not just MS. Aircraft control rooms (as well as nuclear power
plants, spacec
On Sun, 24 Jun 2001, Rob Landley wrote:
> I know the geos had nothing to do with digital, it started as a
> windowing GUI for the commodore 64, if you can believe that...
I've actually got a copy, but it's for the Apple // :}
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ker
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Larry McVoy wrote:
> For the last 10 years, Unix has gotten the OS right and the apps wrong
> and Microsoft has gotten the apps right and the OS wrong. Seems like
> there is potential for a win-win.
I've been hoping for this ever since the rumors of "Microsoft
Linux" starte
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Aaron Lehmann wrote:
> However, the very concept of Java encourages not caring about
> "performance, system-design or any elegance whatsoever". If you cared
> about any of those things you would compile to native code (it exists
Native code does not help performance much and
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001, Lee Chin wrote:
> I have a program listening for socket connections on 192.168.1.1, port 80.
>
> What I want to do is have incomming connection requets for IP 192.168.2.1
> and 192.168.3.1 on port 80 also be handled by my server running on
> 192.168.1.1:80
>
> How do I do t
On Mon, 19 Mar 2001, Otto Wyss wrote:
> inactivity. From the impression I got during the following startup, I
> assume Linux (2.4.2, EXT2-filesystem) is not very suited to any power
> failiure or manually switching it off. Not even if there wasn't any
> activity going on.
What data, if any, did
On Thu, 15 Mar 2001, Torrey Hoffman wrote:
> IIRC, when this discussion of swap size first came up, the general
> conclusion was NOT that you should have swap = 2 * RAM, but that you
> should have swap(2.4.x) = 2 * swap(2.2.x), that is, twice as much swap
> as you did under 2.2.x.
it seems to me
On Fri, 2 Mar 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Linus has spoken, and 2.4.x now requires swap = 2x RAM.
I think I missed this. What possible value does this have? (Not even
Sun, the original purveyors of the 2x RAM rule, need this any more).
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsub
On Thu, 15 Feb 2001, Bill Wendling wrote:
> With the horrid (pro-Microsoft) Aschroft in office, who knows what MS
> can get away with. Not to mention all of the pro-business, anti-human
> cronies in Washington running the Presidency (cause \/\/ just can't do
> it).
Most of the pro-business peopl
On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Jeremy Jackson wrote:
> Next, gcc doesn't generate any code which would be placed in the
> stack, nor does it generate any calls/jumps to the stack area.
Unfortunately, you can't count on this. Objective C, for one, requires an
executable stack.
While there have been "unof
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This always struck me as the most stupid rule of thumb I'd ever heard
> of. With this metric, systems which precisely need swap the most
It used to be basically meaningful, for systems that had to swap, instead
of page. In those cases, in order to
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, William T Wilson wrote:
> If that's true, then the following C programlet should remove the file:
I lied. You need to include not
Oh no! This is linux-kernel. I thought it was debian-user. Sorry,
didn't mean to waste bandwidth :}
-
To unsubscribe f
On Sat, 23 Dec 2000, Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> rm probably stat'd the file beforing removing it -- and failed,
> because it's either old or uses and old library (which isn't LFS
> aware)
If that's true, then the following C programlet should remove the file:
Replace "huge-file-name" with the full
On Wed, 1 Nov 2000, Dennis Bjorklund wrote:
> I'm trying to turn of the broadcast flag for a network card. But I
> can't, why??
Broadcast determines the type of connection - broadcast or point-to-point
(there can be other types also, but you will not see them much).
You wouldn't want to do this
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000, Mike A. Harris wrote:
> to know if after installing updated packages, if I'll still be
> able to use a 2.2.x kernel ok, or if I'll have to resort to
> initscript trickery:
Some people get success with the old kernel and the new modutils, others
find that it does not work. M
16 matches
Mail list logo
