lostecho/oldlinux-files
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

add directory mail-archive

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
gohigh
2024-02-19 00:25:02 -05:00
parent 07129c3397
commit a778c607a4
1056 changed files with 796887 additions and 0 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

568
mail-archive/linux-activists/Volume6/digest206 Normal file
View File

@@ -0,0 +1,568 @@
Subject: Linux-Activists Digest #206
From: Digestifier <Linux-Activists-Request@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>
To: Linux-Activists@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: Linux-Activists@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 93 14:13:09 EDT
Linux-Activists Digest #206, Volume #6 Mon, 6 Sep 93 14:13:09 EDT
Contents:
SLS-1.03: What is "/dev/log=" (wd)
help (""Fritz.Ganter@fvkmads02.tu-graz.ac.at, Tu-Graz@fvkmads02.tu-graz.ac.at,)
Re: NeXTStep & Linux (DAVID L. JOHNSON)
Re: NeXTStep & Linux (Hugh D.R. Evans (ESA/ESTEC/WMA Netherlands))
where's "look"? (Shaogang Gong)
Re: ll (Frank OEynes)
Re: NeXTStep & Linux [QUIT!] (Frank OEynes)
Re: ll (Fritz Ganter)
Re: BSD UNIX (Denis Fortin)
Re: NeXTStep & Linux (James Hammett)
[Help] AHA 1540B + TEAC CD-50 in linux/Dos (Teng-Wen Chang)
Re: (was: Re: A Word Processor for Linux) (Joshua R. Poulson)
Re: NeXTStep & Linux (Rich Mulvey)
Re: BBS package (MCREYNPA)
Re: Remote task-starting (A06012XT@AWIUNI11.EDVZ.UniVie.AC.AT)
Re: BSD UNIX (Alan Cox)
Re: tsipp3.0 compiled? (Christoph Piotti)
tsipp3.0b compiled (Christoph Piotti)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: wd@pcsbst.pcs.com (wd)
Subject: SLS-1.03: What is "/dev/log="
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 07:54:28 GMT
The subject says it all:
In the current SLS release there is a file "/dev/log=" - what is
this supposed to be?
Wolfgang
=====================================================================
Wolfgang Denk (+49)-89-68004-288
Digital-PCS Systemtechnik GmbH, Pfaelzer-Wald-Str. 36, 81539 Muenchen
Email: wd@pcsbst.pcs.com or wd@pcs.dec.com
#####################################################################
# The first thing we do is kill all the lawyers. #
# (Shakespeare. II Henry VI, Act IV, scene ii) #
#####################################################################
------------------------------
From: ""Fritz.Ganter@fvkmads02.tu-graz.ac.at, Tu-Graz@fvkmads02.tu-graz.ac.at,
Subject: help
Date: 6 Sep 1993 05:02:23 -0400
Reply-To: ""Fritz.Ganter@fvkmads02.tu-graz.ac.at, Tu-Graz@fvkmads02.tu-graz.ac.at,
========
remove ganter@fvkmads02.tu-graz.ac.at
------------------------------
From: dlj0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (DAVID L. JOHNSON)
Subject: Re: NeXTStep & Linux
Date: 6 Sep 93 05:15:13 GMT
In article <1993Sep5.225916.776@kf8nh.wariat.org>, bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
>In article <930904.224103.9T2.rusnews.w165w@mulvey.com> rich@mulvey.com (Rich Mulvey) writes:
>>rlion@access.digex.net (crazy lion) writes:
>>> nextssetp is, in my opinion the best OS there is. but it's hardware
>>> requirements are just too great for intel. you'd have to have a fully
>>> loaded comupter to even get one program running. so i doubt that anyoe
>>> would spend all the time it owuld take to write it when few could benefit..
>>>
>> "Too great for Intel?" Ummmm... you may be interested in knowing that
>>it has been available on Intel processors for several months now... and
>>in fact, since Next is no longer producing hardware, the average person
>>is likely to see it *only* on Intel machines... :-)
>
>Which doesn't change the fact that it rivals NT for hardware requirements to
>run it....
>
I'm sorry, but I just don't see what is so great about NeXT or NeXTStep. I
know the answer that Jobs and company give, but let's get beyond the pretty
icons and the hype.
It's deadly slow on a NeXT itself. It requires a 486/66 with eisa, 16 meg ram,
and 2 meg on the video card to run half-way decent monochrome graphics. With
linux on a box like that, it'd be incredibly fast. While I have not seen the
Intel port in action, whaddya bet it's terribly slow on even that setup?
If you want software beyond what comes with it? Let's say we get tired of
the dictionary, and ObjectBuilder. What else is there? From the ifdef NEXT
stuff you see in c programs, it seems that it's a pain in the &*^) to write
for, compared to most unices. What is available? No X11 stuff will be
easy to port -- it'll have to be completely re-written.
There isn't that much commercial software out there for it, and what there is
is very expensive.
I can't see any future for this product, not at the price, seeing the
limitations of such a small user base and incompatible OS. It seems like
NeXT's last gasp.
>++Brandon
>--
>Brandon S. Allbery kf8nh@kf8nh.ampr.org bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
>"MSDOS didn't get as bad as it is overnight -- it took over ten years
>of careful development." ---dmeggins@aix1.uottawa.ca
>
--
David L. Johnson ID: dlj0@lehigh.edu
Department of Mathematics
Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA 18015 Telephone: 215-758-3759 (office)
215-282-3708 (home)
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
------------------------------
From: hevans@estwm0.wm.estec.esa.nl (Hugh D.R. Evans (ESA/ESTEC/WMA Netherlands))
Subject: Re: NeXTStep & Linux
Reply-To: hevans@wm.estec.esa.nl
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 10:59:22 GMT
In article <1993Sep5.225916.776@kf8nh.wariat.org>, bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
|>
|>In article <930904.224103.9T2.rusnews.w165w@mulvey.com> rich@mulvey.com (Rich Mulvey) writes:
|>>rlion@access.digex.net (crazy lion) writes:
|>>> nextssetp is, in my opinion the best OS there is. but it's hardware
|>>> requirements are just too great for intel. you'd have to have a fully
|>>> loaded comupter to even get one program running. so i doubt that anyoe
|>>> would spend all the time it owuld take to write it when few could benefit..
|>>>
|>> "Too great for Intel?" Ummmm... you may be interested in knowing that
|>>it has been available on Intel processors for several months now... and
|>>in fact, since Next is no longer producing hardware, the average person
|>>is likely to see it *only* on Intel machines... :-)
|>
|>Which doesn't change the fact that it rivals NT for hardware requirements to
|>run it....
|>
That and its $1000 entry cost is enough to choke most users.
Not that it isn't worth it, but I can't afford it, well... justify it.
--
Hugh Evans
European Space Research and Technology Centre - Noorwijk, Netherlands
Internet: hevans@wm.estec.esa.nl SPAN: ESTWM2::hevans
Here's to woman! Would that we could fall into
her arms without falling into her hands.
-Ambrose Bierce
------------------------------
From: sgg@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (Shaogang Gong)
Subject: where's "look"?
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 10:51:19 GMT
is there a program in linux that is similar to "look" on
a Sun Sparc? if so, what is it? if it's not in the slackware
distribution, where i can ftp one?
many thanks.
--
Shaogang Gong, Computer Science Department,
Queen Mary and Westfield College,
Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, England
Email: sgg@dcs.qmw.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: frank@mack.uit.no (Frank OEynes)
Subject: Re: ll
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 11:41:37 GMT
ll is an alias probably found in the .profile of the user you
were logged in as. It is probably added because it is perhaps
the most common alias among unix users.
personally i prefer
alias ll='ls -la'
(By the way - this is not a Linux specific question!)
--
/////// Frank \Oynes // frankoe@phys.uit.no ///
////// University of Troms\o // tel: +47 (0)83 45197 ////
///// Dept. of Physics // fax : 89852 /////
//// (Auroral Observatory) // snail: N-9000 Troms\o //////
------------------------------
From: frank@mack.uit.no (Frank OEynes)
Subject: Re: NeXTStep & Linux [QUIT!]
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 12:02:15 GMT
We have been wasting bandwidth for three weeks now flaming NT.
Let's not start a new flamewar on NeXT !
These groups are named comp.os.linux.??? for a reason.
Let us concentrate on constructive criticism of Linux, and raise above
destructive flaming of other OS's !
Maybe it is necessary to add this statement to READ-THIS-BEFORE-POSTING :-)
--
/////// Frank \Oynes // frankoe@phys.uit.no ///
////// University of Troms\o // tel: +47 (0)83 45197 ////
///// Dept. of Physics // fax : 89852 /////
//// (Auroral Observatory) // snail: N-9000 Troms\o //////
------------------------------
From: ganter@fvkmapc02.tu-graz.ac.at (Fritz Ganter)
Subject: Re: ll
Date: 6 Sep 1993 12:12:47 GMT
Frank OEynes (frank@mack.uit.no) wrote:
: ll is an alias probably found in the .profile of the user you
more correct: if no .profile exists, then it's in /etc/profile
: were logged in as. It is probably added because it is perhaps
: the most common alias among unix users.
: personally i prefer
: alias ll='ls -la'
: (By the way - this is not a Linux specific question!)
: --
: /////// Frank \Oynes // frankoe@phys.uit.no ///
--
Fritz Ganter Graz University of Technology, Austria
Email: ganter@fvkmapc02.tu-graz.ac.at, ganter@fvkmads02.tu-graz.ac.at
HAM-Radio: OE6FAD@OE6XYG.AUT.EU, OE6FAD@OE6FAD.AMPR.ORG
Phone: +43 316 873-7222 (Office), +43 316 663243 (home)
********** Linux... try it, use it, love it. ************
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.386bsd.misc
From: fortin@zap.uniforum.qc.ca (Denis Fortin)
Subject: Re: BSD UNIX
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 12:06:29 GMT
In article <michaelv.747084422@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu> michaelv@iastate.edu (Michael L. VanLoon) writes:
>Linux is a completely different beast. [...]
>Until recently, its networking was not at all complete. They have recently
>adopted Net/2, but it is still somewhat buggy.
Actually, I recently discovered by reading one of the Linux FAQs that
Linux's Net-2 simply means "the second release of the Linux networking
code" and has nothing to do with Berkeley's Net/2 (which I originally
thought it was).
--
Denis, fortin@zap.uniforum.qc.ca
------------------------------
From: James Hammett <jamesh@apple.com>
Subject: Re: NeXTStep & Linux
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 13:32:12 GMT
In article <1993Sep6.051513.38107@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> DAVID L. JOHNSON,
dlj0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu writes:
> I'm sorry, but I just don't see what is so great about NeXT or
NeXTStep. I
> know the answer that Jobs and company give, but let's get beyond the
pretty
> icons and the hype.
It took me less than an hour to setup the networking on my NeXT. I
can now log into it from my Macintosh with NCSA Telnet. On my linux box
I've been trying to get the thing to even recognize my host's name and
the ethernet card for about 2 weeks.
> It's deadly slow on a NeXT itself. It requires a 486/66 with eisa, 16
meg ram,
> and 2 meg on the video card to run half-way decent monochrome graphics.
With
> linux on a box like that, it'd be incredibly fast. While I have not
seen the
> Intel port in action, whaddya bet it's terribly slow on even that setup?
About 80-90% on (supposedly) of the Video speed.
> for, compared to most unices. What is available? No X11 stuff will be
> easy to port -- it'll have to be completely re-written.
There are several ports of X to the NeXT: 2 Public domain (MouseX, and
one
by Tufts University). There are at least 2 commercial versions, that
support Motiff, available (Pencom's Co-Xist, and eXedous).
> There isn't that much commercial software out there for it, and what
>there is is very expensive.
True, but the same can be said for almost all unices.
later,
James
------------------------------
From: Teng-Wen Chang <tc38+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: [Help] AHA 1540B + TEAC CD-50 in linux/Dos
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 10:32:04 -0400
Do anyone have the successful case with this configuration, in
Linux/Dos? I setup the SCSI id to be 2, and the terminator is installed
at both end (one is Adaptec 1540B, another is Teac CD-50 CDROM-driver,
and it's the only SCSI driver I have now)
Both dos and linux can recognize the CDROM driver at properly ID and
CUN(0), but I just can't find the data of the CD-ROM. I use the
ASP4DOS.sys from adaptec and Corel SCSI driver on the DOS part, and it
works fine before I tried to use it. I even can't reject the disc by
using the reject buttom.
Since I am new to both sides: SCSI card and CDROM, I wonder is it the
problem of driver(CDROM), or the problem of Adaptec 1540B?
Any help is appreciated
tengwen
================
------------------------------
From: jrp@widcat.Widener.EDU (Joshua R. Poulson)
Subject: Re: (was: Re: A Word Processor for Linux)
Date: 6 Sep 1993 15:12:54 GMT
Reply-To: Joshua.R.Poulson@cyber.Widener.EDU
In article <26aulc$ier@news.bu.edu>, heiser@bumetb.bu.edu (Bill Heiser) writes:
|> In article <WEASEL.93Aug5160625@mecom.oulu.fi> weasel@mecom.oulu.fi (Kari T. Salmela) writes:
|> > By the way, I have noticed that old UNIX farts are absolutely
|> >most conservative persons I've ever met. Not even IBM<tm> :) mainframe
|> [...]
|> >It's kinda sad to see 25 year old people who are totally fixed to
|> >their old customs, unable and unwilling to learn & use anything which
|> >has been coded in the 80's or 90's..
|>
|> 25-year old people are "old unix farts"????
Yeah, really. Looks like I'm getting grief for liking "TeX" here too. :)
--JRP [24 years old, a systems administrator, and runs Linux at home]
------------------------------
From: rich@mulvey.com (Rich Mulvey)
Subject: Re: NeXTStep & Linux
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 10:29:31 EDT
dlj0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (DAVID L. JOHNSON) writes:
> In article <1993Sep5.225916.776@kf8nh.wariat.org>, bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Bran
> don S. Allbery) writes:
>>In article <930904.224103.9T2.rusnews.w165w@mulvey.com> rich@mulvey.com (Ric
> h Mulvey) writes:
>>>rlion@access.digex.net (crazy lion) writes:
>>>> nextssetp is, in my opinion the best OS there is. but it's hardware
>>>> requirements are just too great for intel. you'd have to have a fully
>>>> loaded comupter to even get one program running. so i doubt that anyoe
>>>> would spend all the time it owuld take to write it when few could benefit
> ..
>>>>
>>> "Too great for Intel?" Ummmm... you may be interested in knowing that
>>>it has been available on Intel processors for several months now... and
>>>in fact, since Next is no longer producing hardware, the average person
>>>is likely to see it *only* on Intel machines... :-)
>>
>>Which doesn't change the fact that it rivals NT for hardware requirements to
>>run it....
>>
> I'm sorry, but I just don't see what is so great about NeXT or NeXTStep. I
> know the answer that Jobs and company give, but let's get beyond the pretty
> icons and the hype.
>
> It's deadly slow on a NeXT itself. It requires a 486/66 with eisa, 16 meg ra
> m,
> and 2 meg on the video card to run half-way decent monochrome graphics. With
> linux on a box like that, it'd be incredibly fast. While I have not seen the
> Intel port in action, whaddya bet it's terribly slow on even that setup?
>
> If you want software beyond what comes with it? Let's say we get tired of
> the dictionary, and ObjectBuilder. What else is there? From the ifdef NEXT
> stuff you see in c programs, it seems that it's a pain in the &*^) to write
> for, compared to most unices. What is available? No X11 stuff will be
> easy to port -- it'll have to be completely re-written.
>
> There isn't that much commercial software out there for it, and what there is
> is very expensive.
>
> I can't see any future for this product, not at the price, seeing the
> limitations of such a small user base and incompatible OS. It seems like
> NeXT's last gasp.
>
--
Actually, I saw it in action on a '486 about a month ago at the office of
a Next developer. It was most definately faster on the '486 - Gateway,
by the way. ( I couldn't tell you what speed, though I suspect it was
a 33MHZ machine. )
As for software availability, the developer showed me a number of
PD/Shareware apps that rivaled the work of most MS-DOS/BSD commercial
offerings.
Not that I'm ever likely to use it, but I was impressed, nonetheless.
:-)
- Rich
--
Rich Mulvey Amateur Radio: N2VDS 787 Elmwood Terrace
rich@mulvey.com Rochester, NY 14620
------------------------------
From: mcreynpa@ctrvx1.vanderbilt.edu (MCREYNPA)
Subject: Re: BBS package
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 16:20:00 GMT
In article <26eq9j$shi@news.delphi.com>, tdylew@news.delphi.com (TDYLEW@DELPHI.COM) writes...
>I was wondering if anybody here knew of a BBS package that has been ported
>to Linux. I found Eagle BBS, but it would require a couple hours of
>porting work to get up and running. I am looking for something that would
>be like a mess-dos setup, but allow higher level users to get to the shell.
>
> Tom
>
How about waffle? See comp.bbs.waffle for details.
---
Phillip McReynolds
MCREYNPA@CTRVAX.VANDERBILT.EDU
------------------------------
From: A06012XT@AWIUNI11.EDVZ.UniVie.AC.AT
Subject: Re: Remote task-starting
Date: Mon, 06 Sep 93 18:42:43 MEZ
In article <746099931snx@fidonet.bbs.no>
harald-f@fidonet.bbs.no (Harald Finnaas) writes:
>
>> Look up your man pages on nohup, or use csh, which defaults to nohup.
>> with nohup set, you can log off without killing your process.
>
>The problem is that I've ordered a UNIX manual, but I haven't received it
>yet.:(
try:
man <command>
like:
man nohup
>
>But hey, who needs it with guys like you around? :)
>
Actually it's enough to run nohup like:
nohup .sh &
to run the command .sh in the background with no hangup signals.
Andreas Kostyrka
(A06012XT@HELIOS.UNIVIE.AC.AT till 1.10.93)
(A9207884@GUNTHER.SMC.UNIVIE.AC.AT)
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.386bsd.misc
From: iiitac@swan.pyr (Alan Cox)
Subject: Re: BSD UNIX
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 1993 16:20:39 GMT
In article <CCxLn8.Iv8@zap.uniforum.qc.ca> fortin@zap.uniforum.qc.ca (Denis Fortin) writes:
>In article <michaelv.747084422@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu> michaelv@iastate.edu (Michael L. VanLoon) writes:
>>Linux is a completely different beast. [...]
>>Until recently, its networking was not at all complete. They have recently
>>adopted Net/2, but it is still somewhat buggy.
It's none too complete now, however its great fun helping to debug it.
>
>Actually, I recently discovered by reading one of the Linux FAQs that
>Linux's Net-2 simply means "the second release of the Linux networking
>code" and has nothing to do with Berkeley's Net/2 (which I originally
>thought it was).
This is unfortunately misleading there is NET-2 and NET/2 for Linux. The
first is FvK's work on Ross Biro's from scratch tcp/ip for Linux, the second
is a port of BSD Networking release 2 for Linux. Both exist, both are used.
In time NET-2 should be as good as the BSD networking, but for the moment
its providing some good lessons on interrupt and network writing.
The original primary motive was to avoid potentially 'contaminated' code
from BSD releases getting into Linux given the ATT v BSDI lawsuit. Without
that I'm fairly sure the BSD networking code would have been used straight off.
Alan
iiitac@pyr.swan.ac.uk
------------------------------
From: piotti@uni-muenster.de (Christoph Piotti)
Subject: Re: tsipp3.0 compiled?
Date: 6 Sep 1993 17:30:36 GMT
Christoph Piotti (piotti@uni-muenster.de) wrote:
: Hi!
: Is there anyone who had compiled tsipp3.0?
: I've problems with linking tsipp. There are some missing functions
: ("Referenced undefined functions ...") in tsipp-specific objects.
: It seems to be only a small mistake, but I'm not able to find yet.
: _Christoph
: ---------------------------
: Christoph Piotti piotti.uni-muenster.de
:
------------------------------
From: piotti@uni-muenster.de (Christoph Piotti)
Subject: tsipp3.0b compiled
Date: 6 Sep 1993 17:42:46 GMT
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: Linux-Activists-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux) via:
Internet: Linux-Activists@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
nic.funet.fi pub/OS/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
tupac-amaru.informatik.rwth-aachen.de pub/msdos/replace
The current version of Linux is 0.99pl9 released on April 23, 1993
End of Linux-Activists Digest
******************************