570 lines
21 KiB
Plaintext
570 lines
21 KiB
Plaintext
From: Digestifier <Linux-Activists-Request@news-digests.mit.edu>
|
|
To: Linux-Activists@news-digests.mit.edu
|
|
Reply-To: Linux-Activists@news-digests.mit.edu
|
|
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 92 04:15:16 EST
|
|
Subject: Linux-Activists Digest #6
|
|
|
|
Linux-Activists Digest #6, Volume #1 Wed, 22 Jan 92 04:15:16 EST
|
|
|
|
Contents:
|
|
Re: Buggy omit-frame-pointer? (Linus Benedict Torvalds)
|
|
No VI, sorry ... (Pietro Caselli)
|
|
Linux on Intel Inboard 386. (Sean Eckton)
|
|
Re: Linix: where is /usr/bin/mvdir (Linus Benedict Torvalds)
|
|
Re: No VI, sorry ... (Guess who?)
|
|
Re: No VI, sorry ... (Chris Boyd)
|
|
Re: Installation. (Steven L. Johnson)
|
|
Re: Installing GCC (Bob Smith)
|
|
Re: aha-1542 driver (Tommy Thorn)
|
|
Re: No VI, sorry ... (Pietro Caselli)
|
|
Re: /proc, anyone? (Ari Lemmke)
|
|
Re: No VI, sorry ... (Yaser Doleh)
|
|
Yes, but how *big* is it? (Brian Bartholomew)
|
|
Yes there is a VI (was Re: No VI, sorry ...) (Steven T. Ansell)
|
|
Re: Buggy omit-frame-pointer? (Theodore Y. Ts'o)
|
|
cron (vixie-cron) & postings (Thomas David Rivers)
|
|
Re: Buggy omit-frame-pointer? (Douglas Graham)
|
|
Re: Installing GCC (Theodore Y. Ts'o)
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Benedict Torvalds)
|
|
Subject: Re: Buggy omit-frame-pointer?
|
|
Date: 21 Jan 92 21:32:07 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <1992Jan21.172326.15406@bmerh2.bnr.ca> dgraham@bmers30.bnr.ca (Douglas Graham) writes:
|
|
>Hello. First, I'd like to express my gratitude to Linus and the rest
|
|
>of the Linux contributors. It's a nice piece of work.
|
|
>
|
|
>With that out of the way, let's move on to the bitching :-)
|
|
|
|
Tssk. Be /very/ careful when assuming bugs in gcc: I find it very
|
|
satisfactory, and most bugs aren't in gcc but in the person who thinks
|
|
they are. (Well, there is one known bug in the linux-gcc, but that's
|
|
due to my porting, and doesn't actually make incorrect code).
|
|
|
|
> _printf:
|
|
> pushl %ebx
|
|
> leal 12(%esp),%eax
|
|
> pushl %eax
|
|
> pushl 12(%esp) !!!! THIS SHOULD BE 8(%esp) !!!!
|
|
> pushl $_printbuf
|
|
> call _vsprintf
|
|
|
|
No, 12(%esp) is correct. You are forgetting the return address: there
|
|
are three longs on the stack before the push: %eax, %ebx and the return
|
|
address. Thus the offset 12 is correct. The fact that the resulting
|
|
code actually works should have made you cautious. Not using the frame
|
|
pointer makes for code that is a bit harder to follow, but on a 386
|
|
where the registers are few anyway, I hate to leave one register
|
|
practically unused for no good reason.
|
|
|
|
Linus
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: pietro@deis35.cineca.it (Pietro Caselli)
|
|
Subject: No VI, sorry ...
|
|
Date: 21 Jan 92 22:52:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
Ok, berkeley told me that ... other people told me that ... everybody told
|
|
me that ... I CAN'T POST VI NEITHER IN BINARY NOR IN SOURCE.
|
|
|
|
I didn`t noticed any copyright on sources but, well people told
|
|
me so ...
|
|
|
|
Sorry to all the Vi lovers, I`ll devote myself to Emacs.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Pietro Caselli |
|
|
Internet: pietro@deis35.cineca.it | IF YOU MEET THE BUDDHA
|
|
zaphod@petruz.sublink.org | ON THE ROAD,KILL HIM.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ecktons@sirius.byu.edu (Sean Eckton)
|
|
Subject: Linux on Intel Inboard 386.
|
|
Date: 21 Jan 92 22:09:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am working at University Network Support at Brigham Young University and I
|
|
have only one PC that I work with and it is only an XT with an Intel Inboard
|
|
386 installed. I can get by with it because my other machines are NeXTs.
|
|
|
|
Has anyone tried or does anyone have any idea whether it would work or not in
|
|
my machine? I am really interested, but I only have one machine that I could
|
|
possibly run it on and it seems to be partly capable, but will that be
|
|
enough?
|
|
|
|
Sean Eckton
|
|
ecktons@sirius.byu.edu
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Benedict Torvalds)
|
|
Subject: Re: Linix: where is /usr/bin/mvdir
|
|
Date: 20 Jan 92 23:01:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <1992Jan20.041714.25208@keps.kodak.com> bob@snuffy.dracut.ma.us writes:
|
|
>Has anyone the source or binary for /usr/bin/mvdir ...
|
|
|
|
mvdir needs kernel resources that aren't there yet - it would have been
|
|
my next project after the linked lists, but once again I'm hoping for
|
|
VFS, and I don't want to touch the fs too much before that arrives. The
|
|
reason the rename system call isn't implemented yet is that there are a
|
|
couple of problems with it: it isn't as straightforward as you'd
|
|
imagine. Race conditions, inclusion checking etc..
|
|
|
|
It will befinitely be in 0.13 or 14 - if you remind me. It's not /that/
|
|
difficult, just needs a little thought. In the meantime, you might fake
|
|
it with "cp +recursive" and "rm -rf". Be careful with that though..
|
|
|
|
Linus
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: anlhille@cochiti.ucs.indiana.edu (Guess who?)
|
|
Subject: Re: No VI, sorry ...
|
|
Reply-To: anlhille@arapahoe.ucs.indiana.edu
|
|
Date: 21 Jan 92 18:51:45
|
|
|
|
In article <1992Jan21.225232.27374@deis35.cineca.it> pietro@deis35.cineca.it (Pietro Caselli) writes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, berkeley told me that ... other people told me that ... everybody told
|
|
me that ... I CAN'T POST VI NEITHER IN BINARY NOR IN SOURCE.
|
|
|
|
I didn`t noticed any copyright on sources but, well people told
|
|
me so ...
|
|
|
|
Sorry to all the Vi lovers, I`ll devote myself to Emacs.
|
|
|
|
What about elVIs or steVIe? elVIs can imitate ex and vi, but I dunno
|
|
about steVIe. elVIs is available SOMEWHERE on wuarchive.wustl.edu.
|
|
--
|
|
============== Why does it happen? Because it happens. =============
|
|
============================================== == RUSH =============
|
|
====================================================================
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: clb@hp835.mitek.com (Chris Boyd)
|
|
Subject: Re: No VI, sorry ...
|
|
Date: 21 Jan 92 23:51:00 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <1992Jan21.225232.27374@deis35.cineca.it> pietro@deis35.cineca.it (Pietro Caselli) writes:
|
|
>Ok, berkeley told me that ... other people told me that ... everybody told
|
|
>me that ... I CAN'T POST VI NEITHER IN BINARY NOR IN SOURCE.
|
|
|
|
How about elvis, a vi clone? Here's an excerpt from the man page
|
|
for my MS-DOS verision:
|
|
|
|
|
|
AUTHOR
|
|
Steve Kirkendall
|
|
kirkenda@cs.pdx.edu
|
|
...uunet!tektronix!psueea!eecs!kirkenda
|
|
|
|
Many other people have worked to port elvis to various
|
|
operating systems. To see who deserves credit, run the
|
|
:version command from within elvis, or look in the system-
|
|
specific section of the complete documentation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I don't have the skills to port this, but I KNOW that someone out
|
|
there does.
|
|
--
|
|
(* Chris Boyd OpenConnect Systems, Inc. clb@oc.com *)
|
|
(* 2033 Chennault, Carrollton TX 75006, USA. Real close to Dallas *)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: johnson@jvnc.net (Steven L. Johnson)
|
|
Subject: Re: Installation.
|
|
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 00:31:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
gmartin@mcs213d.cs.umr.edu (Greg Martin ) writes:
|
|
|
|
>We still couldn't find a way to make Linux use
|
|
>anything bigger than a 32M partition, but oh, well.
|
|
|
|
The limitation in Linux is 64M (actually 65535 1K blocks) not 32M.
|
|
I used edpart to create multiple 64M partitions (64,999 blocks).
|
|
|
|
The version I used was: edpart.exe 23833 12-12-90 11:06
|
|
|
|
Are you saying that you can't create a 64M partition with edpart,
|
|
that mkfs refuses to use it, or that Linux has problems when using
|
|
it?
|
|
|
|
-Steve
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: rls@dracut.keps.kodak.com (Bob Smith)
|
|
Subject: Re: Installing GCC
|
|
Date: 22 Jan 92 00:03:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <3856@umriscc.isc.umr.edu> bolsen@mcs213h.cs.umr.edu (Brian Olsen) writes:
|
|
|
|
> I've recently pulled down the gcc and tried installing it. Unfortunately I've
|
|
> been getting errors about it not being able to find its binaries. I tried
|
|
> creating soft links to the files with the gcc- prefix and that helped some,
|
|
> but now I'm getting similar errors regarding as and ld.
|
|
|
|
Put gcc in /usr/bin or some other easily ascessible place, put all the
|
|
gcc- prefixed stuff in /usr/lib ... Should work just fine...
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
\ Bob Smith \ mx: bob@snuffy.dracut.ma.us
|
|
\ 835 Mammoth Rd. \ uucp: ...{ulowell|wang|wybbs}!snuffy!bob
|
|
\ Dracut, MA. 01826 \ office && voice mail: +1 508 670-6712
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: tthorn@daimi.aau.dk (Tommy Thorn)
|
|
Subject: Re: aha-1542 driver
|
|
Date: 21 Jan 92 01:02:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
[Actually To: abc@concert.net, but is bounced and it might have
|
|
general interrest.]
|
|
|
|
drew@hazelrah.cs.colorado is writing a highlevel SCSI driver
|
|
and inviting others
|
|
to write the coresponding lowlevel driver. I'm writing a
|
|
lowlevel driver for aha-1542, first as a fast patch to
|
|
make me use my own computer instead of my friends,
|
|
later as a better and more general driver.
|
|
|
|
Depending on the state of the moon, the first attempt could
|
|
be finished tomorrow or a week later, anyway I'll post to
|
|
alt.os.linux.
|
|
|
|
/Tommy
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Tommy Thorn email: tthorn@daimi.aau.dk
|
|
Computer Science Department "People shouldn't work because they love it,
|
|
Aarhus University they should work because it hurts."
|
|
DENMARK -- Bob Sparacino, former Xerox executive
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: pietro@deis35.cineca.it (Pietro Caselli)
|
|
Subject: Re: No VI, sorry ...
|
|
Date: 22 Jan 92 01:31:44 GMT
|
|
|
|
In <ANLHILLE.92Jan21185145@cochiti.ucs.indiana.edu> anlhille@cochiti.ucs.indiana.edu (Guess who?) writes:
|
|
|
|
> Sorry to all the Vi lovers, I`ll devote myself to Emacs.
|
|
|
|
>What about elVIs or steVIe? elVIs can imitate ex and vi, but I dunno
|
|
>about steVIe. elVIs is available SOMEWHERE on wuarchive.wustl.edu.
|
|
|
|
Well, once you have tasted the feeling of the real Vi, there's no clone
|
|
that can sitasfy you. Anyway, maybe I'l test myself on It.
|
|
|
|
P.S Is there anyone working on a porting on zterm ?
|
|
I managed to make it work on Linux, but due to latest things, and since
|
|
Andy Tanenbaum wrote ( at least the original term ) for Minix I want to
|
|
rewrite it from scratch.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Pietro Caselli |
|
|
Internet: pietro@deis35.cineca.it | IF YOU MEET THE BUDDHA
|
|
zaphod@petruz.sublink.org | ON THE ROAD,KILL HIM.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: arl@cs.hut.fi (Ari Lemmke)
|
|
Subject: Re: /proc, anyone?
|
|
Date: 21 Jan 92 16:37:29 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
In article <aldavi01.695964381@starbase.spd.louisville.edu> aldavi01@starbase.spd.louisville.edu (Arlie Davis) writes:
|
|
> A few seconds ago I read in my mail that Ari was working on pseudo-devices.
|
|
> For some reason, that reminded me of /proc.
|
|
|
|
Not me ;-) I send mail to the mailing list but didn't
|
|
mention 'forwarded' I thought it was too obvious because
|
|
the mail had part of the original header (send to request).
|
|
|
|
entropy@ee.wpi.edu is the right one ...
|
|
|
|
> Well, is anyone eager for /proc? If we have it from the start, then we can
|
|
> learn to love it, and eventually perhaps even cherish it...
|
|
|
|
I have always wanted un*x to have one part of the FS
|
|
dynamic (only in memory, it's run-time) where all process etc.
|
|
stuff is like:
|
|
|
|
/system/proc
|
|
|
|
You might want to send something to one process with
|
|
|
|
cat foofile > /system/proc/1123
|
|
|
|
Which could cause signal (and the data) to the process 1123.
|
|
|
|
But I don't like over crowding / (root) with stuff like
|
|
/proc etc. Don't make yet another MessDos with flat
|
|
file systems ;-)
|
|
|
|
arl
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: doleh@Tiger.mcs.kent.edu (Yaser Doleh)
|
|
Subject: Re: No VI, sorry ...
|
|
Date: 22 Jan 92 03:28:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
You might be able to compile elivs. elivs is a vi like editor
|
|
that is freely available. Try ftp to prep.ai.mit.edu in /pub/gnu
|
|
--
|
|
===================================================
|
|
Yaser Doleh <doleh@mcs.kent.edu>
|
|
Department Of Mathematics & Computer Science
|
|
Kent State University
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: bb@math.ufl.edu (Brian Bartholomew)
|
|
Subject: Yes, but how *big* is it?
|
|
Date: 22 Jan 92 03:44:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
A couple of disk-size related questions, which are all the rage at our
|
|
site:
|
|
|
|
How much disk space does it take to create a working system
|
|
consisting of only the compiled binaries?
|
|
|
|
How much disk space does it take to create a system containing
|
|
every bit of source that's available, plus all the binaries,
|
|
plus enough free space to remake a second copy of the system
|
|
from scratch?
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable
|
|
one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore
|
|
all progress depends on the unreasonable man." -- George Bernard Shaw
|
|
===============================================================================
|
|
Brian Bartholomew -- University of Florida Internet: bb@math.ufl.edu
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: cccstevn@elroy.ucdavis.edu (Steven T. Ansell)
|
|
Subject: Yes there is a VI (was Re: No VI, sorry ...)
|
|
Date: 22 Jan 92 04:32:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
First of all, I have vi (actually elvis) running under Linux
|
|
right now. It is on tsx-11.mit.edu with the rest of the
|
|
programs. I haven't given it a real harsh test, but it seems
|
|
just fine to me. Second, Elvis is about as close to vi as
|
|
you can get. I have been using it under DOS for about a
|
|
year hand have seen very few significant differences (and this
|
|
is coming from someone who has written some very nasty vi
|
|
macros ;-)).
|
|
--
|
|
-Steven T. Ansell
|
|
Unix Consultant
|
|
Computing Services U.C.D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: tytso@athena.mit.edu (Theodore Y. Ts'o)
|
|
Subject: Re: Buggy omit-frame-pointer?
|
|
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 05:33:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <1992Jan21.172326.15406@bmerh2.bnr.ca> dgraham@bmers30.bnr.ca (Douglas Graham) writes:
|
|
|
|
>For now, I'm cross-compiling Linux from Minix using GCC 1.40. There
|
|
>seems to be a problem with variadic routines compiled with
|
|
>"-fomit-frame-pointer". At first I though that my version of GCC was
|
|
>screwed, but then I noticed that a similar problem shows up in the
|
|
>distributed init/main.s.
|
|
|
|
No, init/main.s is being compiled correctly. I think you're forgetting
|
|
about the return address. (If it wasn't being compiled correctly, my
|
|
kernel wouldn't be able to boot; and I *know* printf works in
|
|
init/main.c :-)
|
|
|
|
This is what the stack looks like just before the call to vsprintf:
|
|
The stack here is growing downwards:
|
|
|
|
argn |
|
|
... | These arguments pushed onto the
|
|
arg0 | stack by the caller
|
|
fmt |
|
|
return addr | pushed on the stack by the call to printk
|
|
%ebx | push %ebx
|
|
&arg0 | push of leal 12(%esp)
|
|
fmt | push of 12(%esp)
|
|
_printbuf | push $_printbuf
|
|
|
|
At this point a call of vsprintf(printbuf, fmt, args) happens.
|
|
|
|
>Strangely enough, my version of GCC uses an offset of 16 in both places
|
|
>where 12 is used above. This is even more wrong. Is this a known bug
|
|
>in GCC? If so, why do all the distributed makefiles use -fomit-frame-pointer?
|
|
>I couldn't get anything to work until I deleted this from the makefiles.
|
|
|
|
Is it using an offset of 16 with no other push calls? Is the assembler
|
|
code otherwise identical? Or is some other register being saved, like
|
|
%ebp? (Not that it should be mucking with the frame pointer anyway,
|
|
since it should be able to use a register to save the variable i instead
|
|
of needing to allocate space on the stack for it.)
|
|
|
|
Perhaps your Minix GCC doesn't handle omit-frame-pointer; the GCC 1.40
|
|
distributed with Linux certainly works correctly with it. It should be
|
|
fine to remove it; -fomit-frame-pointer just makes the resulting
|
|
assembler a little bit more tighter and efficient, at the cost of making
|
|
the code less debugable. But we don't have a kernel debugger right now
|
|
anyway, so we might as well make the code fast. :-)
|
|
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
|
|
Theodore Ts'o bloom-beacon!mit-athena!tytso
|
|
308 High St., Medford, MA 02155 tytso@athena.mit.edu
|
|
Everybody's playing the game, but nobody's rules are the same!
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: rivers@ponds.uucp (Thomas David Rivers)
|
|
Subject: cron (vixie-cron) & postings
|
|
Date: 22 Jan 92 02:24:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, since I haven't heard anything about it yet; I've begun working
|
|
on a usable cron(1). [You really need one to get decent mail going.]
|
|
|
|
I grabbed the vixie-cron from comp.sources and after wrestling some
|
|
poor memory references (referencing free'd memory) almost have it
|
|
working.
|
|
|
|
The problem I'm having is with sleep() returning too soon. It looks
|
|
like the child is dieing, causing a SIG_CHLD; which I should either
|
|
catch or ignore - neither of which do much - the sleep is then
|
|
terminated, causing the children to be run over and over, more than
|
|
once a second!
|
|
|
|
Ideas???
|
|
|
|
- Dave Rivers -
|
|
|
|
p.s. I have the uuencode and uudecode from the BSD source tree ported
|
|
(no big deal) - are we going to post small binaries/shar files here,
|
|
or should items like this go directly to some/all FTP archives?
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: dgraham@bmers30.bnr.ca (Douglas Graham)
|
|
Subject: Re: Buggy omit-frame-pointer?
|
|
Date: 22 Jan 92 04:57:25 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <1992Jan21.213207.18979@klaava.Helsinki.FI> torvalds@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Linus Benedict Torvalds) writes:
|
|
|
|
>Tssk. Be /very/ careful when assuming bugs in gcc: I find it very
|
|
>satisfactory, and most bugs aren't in gcc but in the person who thinks
|
|
>they are. (Well, there is one known bug in the linux-gcc, but that's
|
|
>due to my porting, and doesn't actually make incorrect code).
|
|
|
|
Blush. I'm usually very cautious when I think I've found a bug in a
|
|
compiler. It seems that in this case, I wasn't quite cautious enough.
|
|
But for good reason ...
|
|
|
|
>> _printf:
|
|
>> pushl %ebx
|
|
>> leal 12(%esp),%eax
|
|
>> pushl %eax
|
|
>> pushl 12(%esp) !!!! THIS SHOULD BE 8(%esp) !!!!
|
|
>> pushl $_printbuf
|
|
>> call _vsprintf
|
|
>
|
|
>No, 12(%esp) is correct. You are forgetting the return address: there
|
|
>are three longs on the stack before the push: %eax, %ebx and the return
|
|
>address. Thus the offset 12 is correct.
|
|
|
|
Actually, what I was overlooking was that the "pushl %eax" decremented
|
|
the stack pointer. This comes, as you mention, from not being accustumed
|
|
to examining code which doesn't use the frame pointer.
|
|
|
|
>The fact that the resulting
|
|
>code actually works should have made you cautious.
|
|
|
|
Except that, in my case, the resulting code did not actually work.
|
|
(The makefile generates main.o from main.c not main.s -- why was main.s
|
|
included?) As I mentioned, my version of GCC 1.40 was using an offset of
|
|
16 instead of 12, and not only in this file/function. Anyway, I guess
|
|
what this means is that I need to take a close look at what I've done
|
|
to my GCC, rather than sending off mail to Stallman (or here).
|
|
|
|
>Not using the frame
|
|
>pointer makes for code that is a bit harder to follow, but on a 386
|
|
>where the registers are few anyway, I hate to leave one register
|
|
>practically unused for no good reason.
|
|
|
|
One good reason I can think of, is that it allows debuggers to work.
|
|
Has GDB been ported to Linux yet?
|
|
--
|
|
Doug Graham dgraham@bnr.ca My opinions are my own.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: tytso@athena.mit.edu (Theodore Y. Ts'o)
|
|
Subject: Re: Installing GCC
|
|
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1992 06:17:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <3856@umriscc.isc.umr.edu> bolsen@mcs213h.cs.umr.edu (Brian Olsen) writes:
|
|
|
|
>I've recently pulled down the gcc and tried installing it.
|
|
>Unfortunately I've been getting errors about it not being able to find
|
|
>its binaries. I tried creating soft links to the files with the gcc-
|
|
>prefix and that helped some, but now I'm getting similar errors
|
|
>regarding as and ld.
|
|
|
|
I've been seeing this question a lot, so I'll pull in something from the
|
|
soon to be released (I hope!) FAQ list: (People are working hard on it,
|
|
behind the scenes....)
|
|
|
|
- Ted
|
|
|
|
QUESTION: I've got all the things on site ??? but I don't know what
|
|
goes where.
|
|
|
|
ANSWER: include.tar.Z goes to /usr/include; ggcbin.tar.Z goes in
|
|
/usr/local/lib except gcc which goes in /usr/local/bin. Moreover each
|
|
gcc-xxx of /usr/local/lib should be linked with gxxx and xxx in
|
|
/usr/local/bin.
|
|
system.tar.Z contains the latest sources of the system files (mkswap,
|
|
mkfs, fsck and fdisk). utils.tar.Z contains a new tar to handle the
|
|
symbolic links, make, uemacs and minor programs (sed,...).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
|
|
|
|
The service addresse, 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 alt.os.linux) via:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Activsts@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 0.12, released on Jan 14, 1992
|
|
|
|
End of Linux-Activsts Digest
|
|
******************************
|