693 lines
26 KiB
Plaintext
693 lines
26 KiB
Plaintext
From: Digestifier <Linux-Misc-Request@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu>
|
|
To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
|
Reply-To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
|
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 94 07:13:06 EDT
|
|
Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #731
|
|
|
|
Linux-Misc Digest #731, Volume #2 Sat, 10 Sep 94 07:13:06 EDT
|
|
|
|
Contents:
|
|
Re: DOOM, X, Linux, 320x200 video mode ?? (Tim Smith)
|
|
320x200 X resolution? (Sam Oscar Lantinga)
|
|
Re: DOOM and Linux (Bill C. Riemers)
|
|
linux-1.1.50 (Omer Zak)
|
|
Re: Thanks ID and ddt - Linux DOOM is perfect. (Erik Nygren)
|
|
Re: DOOM, X, Linux, 320x200 video mode ?? (Erik Nygren)
|
|
Re: Any Sound Blaster drivers for Linux abailable? (Jeff Kesselman)
|
|
Re: Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support (Orc)
|
|
Re: 1.7MB+ format help wanted... (Craig Woodward)
|
|
Re: Colorado Jumbo250 (Dennis Duffner)
|
|
Re: Which is the best Linux CD package? (ACC Corp.)
|
|
mount & mtools Problem! (Frank J. Potolo)
|
|
sunsite is down (Erik Troan)
|
|
Re: Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support (Pete Bergstrom)
|
|
Re: OS/2 vs. Unix Which one is better and why??? (Pete Deuel)
|
|
*** PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE POSTING *** (misc-2.07) (Ian Jackson)
|
|
new machine to linux or not?!?!?!?! (Huan Chang)
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: tzs@u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
|
|
Crossposted-To: alt.games.doom
|
|
Subject: Re: DOOM, X, Linux, 320x200 video mode ??
|
|
Date: 10 Sep 1994 04:11:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
Bill C. Riemers <bcr@physics.purdue.edu> wrote:
|
|
> 2. There is significant delay between action and sound. i.e. I
|
|
> can fire my gun and then turn halfway around before the gun
|
|
> sound comes through my speakers.
|
|
|
|
Get shorter speaker cables.
|
|
|
|
--Tim Smith
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development
|
|
From: slouken@cs.ucdavis.edu (Sam Oscar Lantinga)
|
|
Subject: 320x200 X resolution?
|
|
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 22:54:22 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Does such a thing exist?
|
|
How would I go about finding the dot-clocks, etc for this resolution?
|
|
Does XFree86 3.1 have it? Where can I get it?
|
|
|
|
Thanks for any information....
|
|
|
|
-Sam Lantinga (slouken@cs.ucdavis.edu)
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.S. DOOM for X exists, and will hopefully be released soon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: bcr@k9.via.term.none (Bill C. Riemers)
|
|
Crossposted-To: alt.games.doom
|
|
Subject: Re: DOOM and Linux
|
|
Date: 10 Sep 1994 05:33:00 GMT
|
|
Reply-To: bcr@physics.purdue.edu
|
|
|
|
>>>>> "Christopher" == Christopher Wiles <a0017097@wsuaix.csc.wsu.edu> writes:
|
|
|
|
Christopher> lmulcahy@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Larry Mulcahy) writes: : I
|
|
Christopher> just tried it today on my 486/40 and performance was
|
|
Christopher> quite : acceptable. The graphics for the -2, -3 and
|
|
Christopher> -4 options were hosed : though, unless this is
|
|
Christopher> supposed to be new Underwater Doom.
|
|
|
|
Christopher> That's four messages so far that report that pixel
|
|
Christopher> doubling is trashed.
|
|
|
|
Christopher> Gee, even though the README says "no bug reports,"
|
|
Christopher> does anyone think iD can be convinced to fix this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
From the way it is worded in the README, I'd say it is best to keep
|
|
you mouth shut and hope one of the developers reads this newsgroup!
|
|
|
|
Bill
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Subject: linux-1.1.50
|
|
From: xlacha1@wizard.weizmann.ac.il (Omer Zak)
|
|
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 1994 00:30:09 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Version 1.1.50 has been posted several several hours ago to ftp.funet.fi.
|
|
Before upgrading my PC from version 1.1.8 to 1.1.50 I would like to know
|
|
if anyone has already installed version 1.1.50 on his system and whether
|
|
there are any problems with it.
|
|
Please post to this newsgroup because I follow it and I am sure that other
|
|
people will be interested as well in the information.
|
|
Thanks,
|
|
--- Omer
|
|
(Internet: xlacha1@wizard.weizmann.ac.il)
|
|
(Ask me about porting the coverage analysis tool GCT to Linux.)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: nygren@news.mit.edu (Erik Nygren)
|
|
Crossposted-To: alt.games.doom
|
|
Subject: Re: Thanks ID and ddt - Linux DOOM is perfect.
|
|
Date: 10 Sep 1994 06:56:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Alan Cox (iialan@iifeak.swan.ac.uk) wrote:
|
|
: In article <1994Sep9.125445.12238@dmu.ac.uk> rl@dmu.ac.uk (Robert Logan) writes:
|
|
: >Yes, Linux DOOM is out and its superb - as smooth
|
|
: >as in DOS and just as tasty. Much appreciation to
|
|
: >Dave Taylor for the work in the port - I can now
|
|
: >Dump DOS...
|
|
|
|
: Umm it seems to be unplayable on standard ISA video cards - even the better
|
|
: dumb ISA cards. Anyone running it with an ISA S3 card and a 8Mb 386DX40 and
|
|
: want to give a performance report since I need a new video card anyway.
|
|
|
|
I'm running it on a 486/66 with the XFree86 Beta P9000 server (which
|
|
does no real acceleration and just acts as a linear local bus frame
|
|
buffer). In this configuration, I get performance that is signifcantly
|
|
better than the same thing on an SGI Indy. There seems to be a byte
|
|
ordering problem with pixel doubling, tripling, and quadrupling which
|
|
scrambles the image. Otherwise those would be decently fast as well.
|
|
|
|
I've also tried it with the 320x200x8 VGA server that will be part of
|
|
XF86_SVGA in XFree86 3.1. The performance here is quite impressive
|
|
(not noticably slower than DOS). A neat trick that works for me is to
|
|
run the XF86_SVGA X server as display :1.0 (320x200) and run my
|
|
XF86_P9000 server as :0.0 in 1024x768 and then just VT switch (and
|
|
swap like crazy) between the two.
|
|
|
|
I hope David Taylor will have a little bit of time to fix the byte
|
|
ordering problems in pixel scaling..... :-) I don't know what their
|
|
deal is with not making money off Linux. I'd never buy a DOS game
|
|
because I go to DOS so little, but I would be very tempted to buy
|
|
registered Doom or Doom II for Linux.
|
|
|
|
|
|
On a related topic (which is probably my fault):
|
|
I've also been trying to get sound to work with Linux Doom and
|
|
my PAS16. I'm using the sound drivers from the 1.1.50 kernel.
|
|
There's a great deal of static along with the sound. The kernel
|
|
also returns errors like:
|
|
|
|
Sep 10 01:56:46 foundation kernel: Sound: DMA timed out - IRQ/DRQ config error?
|
|
|
|
After a few seconds, sound stops entirely. This is strange since
|
|
sound works with everything else under Linux except doom. (I've used
|
|
things like s3mod and other sound players without problems). I've
|
|
messed with IRQ's and DMA's but haven't had any success.
|
|
Any ideas?
|
|
|
|
Thanks,
|
|
Erik
|
|
|
|
___________________________________________________________________________
|
|
Erik Nygren \ \ \ Massachusetts Institute of Technology
|
|
450 Memorial Drive \ \ \ Email: nygren@mit.edu Voice: 617/225-9297
|
|
Cambridge, MA 02139 \ \ \ http://www.mit.edu:8001/people/nygren/home.html
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: nygren@news.mit.edu (Erik Nygren)
|
|
Crossposted-To: alt.games.doom
|
|
Subject: Re: DOOM, X, Linux, 320x200 video mode ??
|
|
Date: 10 Sep 1994 07:14:42 GMT
|
|
|
|
Bill C. Riemers (bcr@k9.via.term.none) wrote:
|
|
: >>>>> "Hans" == Hans Peter Verne <hpv@lynx.uio.no> writes:
|
|
|
|
: Hans> Now that DOOM has been released for Linux w/X (Thanx,
|
|
: Hans> Dave!), how about a nice video mode for it ? David Taylor
|
|
: Hans> says: "I understand there's now a 320x200 mode. I'd
|
|
: Hans> recommend it."
|
|
|
|
: Hans> Anybody knows how to set up such a mode? It's standard VGA,
|
|
: Hans> as far as I know (which isn't very far...), but can it be
|
|
: Hans> run by any server ? What about dotclocks, vertical timing,
|
|
: Hans> horisontal timing, etc ? The regular files that came with
|
|
: Hans> Xfree86 didn't mention that low resolution..... :-(
|
|
|
|
The 320x200 mode that is being referred to is a new 320x200x8 VGA
|
|
server that will be included in XFree86 3.1. It may not be possible
|
|
to get this resolution with other servers (I may be wrong here) and
|
|
guessing can damage many monitors.
|
|
|
|
: Also I can't figure out how to use the VGA mode instead, of the x
|
|
: mode.
|
|
|
|
It is X only.... There is no mode that uses svgalib.
|
|
|
|
--- Erik
|
|
|
|
___________________________________________________________________________
|
|
Erik Nygren \ \ \ Massachusetts Institute of Technology
|
|
450 Memorial Drive \ \ \ Email: nygren@mit.edu Voice: 617/225-9297
|
|
Cambridge, MA 02139 \ \ \ http://www.mit.edu:8001/people/nygren/home.html
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: jeffpk@netcom.com (Jeff Kesselman)
|
|
Subject: Re: Any Sound Blaster drivers for Linux abailable?
|
|
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 22:28:06 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <Pine.3.07.9408271330.A47593-a100000@pilot.stu.cowan.edu.au> mbru6513@pilot.stu.cowan.edu.au (Matt Bruce) writes:
|
|
>Hi,
|
|
>
|
|
>Being relatively new to the wonderful world of Linux, I was wondering if
|
|
>drivers have been written for the Sound Blaster cards. In particular, I
|
|
>have a SB AWE32 with 2 Mb RAM, that would be a shame to leave to MSDOS
|
|
>alone.
|
|
|
|
You will be happy to know that my Linux system has an SB AWE32 with the
|
|
basic 1MB ram. Though i havent exercised it yet, according to the boot
|
|
messages Linux finds nto only the sounds balster comoatable registers but
|
|
the Opal compatable ones as well during boot (I was impressed.)
|
|
|
|
I also run my CD-ROM off of the AWE32's Sony interface (A sony CDU-33
|
|
drive) just fine.
|
|
|
|
jeffk@crystald.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: orc@pell.com (Orc)
|
|
Subject: Re: Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support
|
|
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 21:35:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <1994Sep8.142206.18896@cs.cornell.edu>,
|
|
Matt Welsh <mdw@cs.cornell.edu> wrote:
|
|
|
|
>RMS's idea (which I have heard first-hand) is that Linux systems
|
|
>should be considered GNU systems with Linux as the kernel.
|
|
|
|
Well, that certainly puts a new twist on the GPL. An unpleasant
|
|
one; GPLing things makes them part of the GNU project.
|
|
|
|
[...]
|
|
>Why shouldn't GNU receive recognition for this?
|
|
|
|
No reason. But since my first interpretation of RMS's idea is
|
|
that the FSF will take credit for work they've not done, it seems
|
|
like it's not the most politic way to ask for recognition.
|
|
|
|
____
|
|
david parsons \bi/ who won't be GPLing any more of his code.
|
|
\/
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: cdw@cci.com (Craig Woodward)
|
|
Subject: Re: 1.7MB+ format help wanted...
|
|
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 21:33:32 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <pageoneCvqFHu.x0@netcom.com>, <pageone@netcom.com> wrote:
|
|
> I would like information on how to set the /etc/fdprm file
|
|
>to hold the correct formats for the 1.7mb and 1.9mb disks (and any other
|
|
>high-density formats). I'm using Slackware 2.0.0 and Linux kernel 1.0.9.
|
|
|
|
sunsite.unc.edu:/pub/linux/kernel?misc-patches/floppy/fdpatch*
|
|
|
|
It's the 'original' fd patch for kernels starting at 1.0.something
|
|
and has lots of helpfully docs and source with it.
|
|
-Woody
|
|
--
|
|
---
|
|
I represent my own ideas. Yes, I DO think, all on my own, without the
|
|
collective. Sure, you may think "NT's just putting him up to this", and
|
|
you my be right, but thats only what I say, not why I say it. :)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: duffy@dduff@dduff.ppci.com (Dennis Duffner)
|
|
Subject: Re: Colorado Jumbo250
|
|
Date: 9 Sep 1994 02:37:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
Dennis Duffner (dduff@MCS.COM) wrote:
|
|
: Will this work with Linux 1.1.18?? If so, which version of FTape should
|
|
: I have installed? Thanks!!!!
|
|
|
|
Also, will a Conner 120 or 250 work? (I've got a choice, thankfully.)
|
|
|
|
Mucho thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: info@acc-corp.com (ACC Corp.)
|
|
Subject: Re: Which is the best Linux CD package?
|
|
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 17:18:24 GMT
|
|
|
|
In Article <778341686snx@zmemw16.demon.co.uk>, Stephen@zmemw16.demon.co.uk
|
|
(Stephen Parkinson) wrote:
|
|
>
|
|
>Infomagic consistently quote me $20 for over the net orders
|
|
>and $8 P&P to the UK.
|
|
>
|
|
>I've just ordered the next release due endish of September.
|
|
>
|
|
>They do two versions of linux, the other one is more expensive.
|
|
>
|
|
Infomagic do offer one of the best price/performance Linux CD's being their
|
|
$20 two CD set. Their June release had a live kernal on the CD, but does
|
|
not run X windows. Infomagic is out of stock of their June release, as are
|
|
most of their resellers (including ourselves) but are taking orders for
|
|
their upcoming September release that should be available by the end of
|
|
September.
|
|
|
|
Yggdrasil's package not only runs Linux and X windows but has a bunch of
|
|
other utilities and programs that will run from the CD including the C
|
|
compiler. Yggdrasil's list price was $39.95 but I understand their next
|
|
release, due out shortly, will be about $35.
|
|
|
|
Infomagic also resells the Slackware Professional 2.0 Linux Package from
|
|
Morse. The "list price" on this is $49.95
|
|
It includes some additional installation features that make it very easy to
|
|
install, as well as the ability to run Linux including X windows from the CD.
|
|
Slackware Professional package is the "official" release of Patrick
|
|
Volkerding's Slackware distribution and includes Matt Welsh's Linux
|
|
Installation and Getting Started Guide.
|
|
|
|
Cheers, Bob.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACC Bookstores
|
|
"Home of the PC UNIX - Linux Catalog"
|
|
1 (800) 546-7274
|
|
info@acc-corp.com
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
|
|
From: av643@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Frank J. Potolo)
|
|
Subject: mount & mtools Problem!
|
|
Reply-To: av643@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Frank J. Potolo)
|
|
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 16:45:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am experienceing a hang-up problem when I mount my C: drive (/dev/hda1)
|
|
to my Linux 1.0.9. Telnet and ftp to my machine freeze when I do ls and
|
|
ftp, especially on the mounted files. Here is what I use, "mount -t msdos
|
|
-o conv=auto /dev/hda1 /mnt"
|
|
|
|
I also tried mtools, using "mcd c:/", and it said that c: drive is
|
|
not supported. Is this true? How can we use mtools on c: dirve?
|
|
|
|
Any idea/suggestion/word might put me in a good spirit?
|
|
|
|
- Frank
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ewt@netcom.com (Erik Troan)
|
|
Subject: sunsite is down
|
|
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 1994 18:28:51 GMT
|
|
|
|
This should have gone out before now - sorry for the delay.
|
|
|
|
sunsite.unc.edu will be unavailable all day today for a full system
|
|
upgrade (hardware, OS, everything). It should be back late this evening
|
|
Eastern time. In the meantime, use mirrors.
|
|
|
|
Erik
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: bergstro@src.honeywell.com (Pete Bergstrom)
|
|
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
|
|
Subject: Re: Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support
|
|
Date: 09 Sep 1994 22:05:14 GMT
|
|
|
|
>>>>> On 8 Sep 1994 17:54:46 -0600, jmaynard@nyx10.cs.du.edu (Jay Maynard) said:
|
|
>>Calm down. The FSF isn't the Borg. They are not out to assimilate Linux.
|
|
|
|
> Of course not. As you point out earlier in your message, they've already
|
|
> done it.
|
|
|
|
Wrong. The implementers of Linux actively decided to use FSF-produced
|
|
tools which fall under the GPL and also decided to place the (majority
|
|
of) the kernel under the GPL. The FSF really didn't have any say in
|
|
the matter (and certainly your statement that "they've already done
|
|
it" is incorrect - "they" didn't do anything of the sort).
|
|
|
|
Pete
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: deuelpm@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Pete Deuel)
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
|
|
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. Unix Which one is better and why???
|
|
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 02:44:54 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <DJOHNSON.94Sep7183616@elvis.ucsd.edu> djohnson@elvis.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson) writes:
|
|
>From: djohnson@elvis.ucsd.edu (Darin Johnson)
|
|
>Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. Unix Which one is better and why???
|
|
>Date: 08 Sep 1994 01:36:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
>Required? What kind of repressive regime requires using DOS
|
|
>apps (that have been shown to cause insanity in lab inhabitants)?
|
|
|
|
This is so profs can keep up with it. DOS crap is easy to find and
|
|
use--commonplace. Save the real OSs for upperclassmen (who will gain wisdom
|
|
from going from DOS to a real OS like Unix)
|
|
|
|
>If they supply the computers, that is one thing; but if a valid
|
|
>alternative is found that should be allowed.
|
|
|
|
Well, you can't expect a University full of professors, each with so many
|
|
students, to all know everything... Again, you get to the upperclassmen and
|
|
grads, and the students can specialize (by then, they should have glommed on
|
|
to someone on the faculty who can *teach* them what they want to learn).
|
|
|
|
>> >What is it that he can "do" with a Linux machine that is
|
|
>> >really productive? Bob says that his friend does
|
|
>> >"all sorts of things" with his machine.
|
|
|
|
Hell, to support this, look at O'Reilley & Associates. Armed with troff and
|
|
rcs and some other Un*x tools that escape me, they can write, edit, and
|
|
typeset entire books! That's productive...
|
|
|
|
|
|
>that Macs are unproductive.
|
|
|
|
for learning anything about computers! I think Un*x teaches one the most, DOS
|
|
is a runner up, maybe. OS/2 just blows chunks, requiring you to know all
|
|
about OS/2 but in the process teaches you nothing about any other computers
|
|
(kinda like the macs in that respect).
|
|
|
|
>> >What I want to know is:
|
|
>> >1) Why do CS majors here use Unix? What is it that is so great about Unix
|
|
>> > that can't be done with OS/2? No flames on this one.
|
|
|
|
Unix makes sense. stdin, stdout things built in highly powerful little
|
|
programs, each able to string into the next. This is wonderfully powerful and
|
|
flexible for the ingeneous user... The initial learnig curve is a bit steep,
|
|
but even the completely uninitiated can do it. Fear of the % is the
|
|
biggest hurdle.
|
|
|
|
OS/2 was problematic for us; I couldn't use too much of my knowledge of
|
|
Windows, DOS, Unix, or X/MWM when I tried to figure out OS/2 (the CONFIG.SYS
|
|
from hell! for instance) OS/2 users, like mac users, have fewer intutive
|
|
skills to use than do DOS/Un*x users. If your boss says "We're using X"
|
|
telling him that you'd rather use a Mac or OS/2 isn't going to earn you
|
|
brownie points...
|
|
|
|
>else (for programming, the TA should be able to get the source code
|
|
>and recompile it though). They can write their reports in whatever
|
|
|
|
Yeah, sure. pile the work on the poor TA... take some 3 hr classes,
|
|
work on a thesis, grade these papers and hey! If some upstart can'g give you
|
|
readily executable code, hell just muck around compiling it! You've got
|
|
the time! This gets back to standardization--DOS is a good least common
|
|
denomonator; you can go GUI or command-line and still hand in something
|
|
that's readily usable and understanable to the masses! I agree with the
|
|
thesis that Unix is the way, but not neccisarily to the ends you suggest...
|
|
|
|
There's something to be said for doing what your told the way your told to do
|
|
it. If it involves yucky old DOS, so be it. When youre done, you might just
|
|
have learned something--how to effectively contrast what you *did* with what
|
|
you "moved up" to and why that was a move up.
|
|
|
|
>UNIX is what the real world in CS uses. CS people are NOT USERS!
|
|
Hmmmmm... Someone writes those mac programs. Borland made the IDE for
|
|
someone!
|
|
|
|
>Being able to run DOS apps is almost useless (most that I know that
|
|
>care about apps would prefer macs anyway).
|
|
|
|
Poppycock.
|
|
|
|
>UNIX machines are
|
|
>multi-user, very network friendly
|
|
|
|
once you know the "secret handshake" and can stomach the syntax
|
|
|
|
> (can you use the school's OS/2
|
|
>machines from home, or across the country?).
|
|
|
|
I hate to admit this, but yes, the potential exsists... Scary, huh?
|
|
|
|
> UNIX machines are up to
|
|
>state of the art in hardware and software (unless you consider
|
|
>software state of the art to mean flashy UI only). UNIX can support
|
|
|
|
I like X, too. X can be as flashy (flashier, even), but sometimes a simple,
|
|
text-based DOS program is good for some things
|
|
|
|
>BIG systems - super computers run UNIX (what will you do when you need
|
|
>real horsepower for your engineering work and the P90 won't cut it?).
|
|
>It's not that CS people are in ivory towers, but they are actually
|
|
>building (or learning about) the systems that everyone else uses.
|
|
>Would you complain "what is so great about calculus for engineers?"
|
|
|
|
But calculus isn't the only tool, either
|
|
|
|
>MSDOS and Macs is completely out as far as educational CS goes.
|
|
>You just can't teach OS principles on machines with outdated
|
|
>OS's. Some places use VMS, others have doddering TOPS machines.
|
|
>Some try to teach under msdos, but probably aren't very effective.
|
|
|
|
>OS/2 is probably ok as an example of how to mess up a good idea.
|
|
>Start chopping down until you have 8, 4, or 2 megs and you'll
|
|
>start getting a better idea. Heck, I used to run with a productive
|
|
>Amiga system - multitasking - with only 1 meg (started with 512K
|
|
>but that limited graphics and buffer space). OS/2 is treated as
|
|
>a big joke by many who have to program in it.
|
|
|
|
512 K is *spoiled*, pal. I used to see some really decent stuff on the old
|
|
C-64s (for the time). And, back to the Trash-80 era, 4 K was once "roomy."
|
|
I know someone who (still!) won't give up his 16K CoCo3 (I presume by now hes
|
|
up to the max K, though--48K?); he's written all the software he needs,
|
|
including some semblance of networking and a custom OS. What a masochist!
|
|
Of course, multitasking here means having serveral computers, but I digress...
|
|
|
|
>> >2) Isn't the lack of "killer" apps a good reason not to use Unix?
|
|
|
|
The lack of really good *games* is what keeps people from Unix. The rest of
|
|
the killer apps are here! Games always sell the system...
|
|
|
|
>This just shows an incredible bias. Personally, I've seen very
|
|
>little under DOS (except games) that I cared to run.
|
|
|
|
Amen!
|
|
|
|
>"Killer" apps means different things depending upon what you want
|
|
>to do. If you like ray tracing, then SGI (unix) has the best
|
|
>killer apps.
|
|
|
|
>If you're a desktop publishing person, Apple probably
|
|
>has the best.
|
|
|
|
Horse hockey! Only 'cause it's fad. Look in the tech writing journals, and
|
|
you'll see a bit of "Quark" but more of FrameMaker and Interleaf whose best
|
|
versions are for X.
|
|
|
|
> If you do desktop video, then it's Amiga. If youbest. If you
|
|
do desktop video, then it's Amiga.
|
|
|
|
Or SGI.
|
|
|
|
>If you want>CAD, it is probably msdos (I
|
|
think).
|
|
|
|
Nah. AutoCad is done for X. I think customized proprietary CADs are likely
|
|
Un*x based... You contradicted yourself unnecissarily...
|
|
|
|
>> >classes) rather than wasting his time by fooling around with Unix.
|
|
|
|
Fooling around with Un*x has made my lessons in C much easier, even though
|
|
I'd never touched Un*x C. That's no waste.
|
|
|
|
>> >I know for a fact that you can't learn Unix (I mean learn it really
|
|
well)just>> >by fooling around with it. So what's the point?
|
|
|
|
sure you can. You just have more to fool with, and in smaller bits... When
|
|
you're sick and tired of foolin', you'll sit down and learn something (Take a
|
|
crash course on Perl, for example)
|
|
|
|
>You can't learn ANYTHING well without fooling around with it!!
|
|
>You get only superficial knowledge. With computers, the most
|
|
|
|
Well, there is something to be said for learning by expoloration, but there
|
|
will come a time when something needs doing (or wants doing very much) and in
|
|
comes the learning.
|
|
|
|
>Learning things only from a book is pitiful. (maybe you should watch
|
|
>some Fawlty Towers in this regard) Why do you think lab classes are
|
|
>usually required?
|
|
|
|
Yeah, labs to "fool around" with the lessons from the book.
|
|
|
|
>I am really glad you are in engineering and not in education.
|
|
>Darin Johnson
|
|
>djohnson@ucsd.edu
|
|
|
|
Darin-- I can't really say I disagree with most of what you say, but I do in
|
|
some places... Other places, I must amplify your arguments. You had a really
|
|
confusing thesis, man... Are *you* in education?!! ;)
|
|
|
|
Pete
|
|
===================================================
|
|
"Actually, I'm a lab mouse on stilts..."
|
|
|
|
E-mail: deuelpm@craft.camp.clarkson.edu
|
|
===================================================
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ijackson@nyx.cs.du.edu (Ian Jackson)
|
|
Subject: *** PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE POSTING *** (misc-2.07)
|
|
Date: 10 Sep 1994 04:03:12 -0600
|
|
|
|
Please do not post questions to comp.os.linux.misc - read on for details of
|
|
which groups you should read and post to.
|
|
|
|
Please do not crosspost anything between different groups of the comp.os.linux
|
|
hierarchy. See Matt Welsh's introduction to the hierarchy, posted weekly.
|
|
|
|
If you have a question about Linux you should get and read the Linux Frequently
|
|
Asked Questions with Answers list from sunsite.unc.edu, in /pub/Linux/docs, or
|
|
from another Linux FTP site. It is also posted periodically to c.o.l.announce.
|
|
|
|
In particular, read the question `You still haven't answered my question!'
|
|
The FAQ will refer you to the Linux HOWTOs (more detailed descriptions of
|
|
particular topics) found in the HOWTO directory in the same place.
|
|
|
|
Then you should consider posting to comp.os.linux.help - not
|
|
comp.os.linux.misc.
|
|
|
|
Note that X Windows related questions should go to comp.windows.x.i386unix, and
|
|
that non-Linux-specific Unix questions should go to comp.unix.questions.
|
|
Please read the FAQs for these groups before posting - look on rtfm.mit.edu in
|
|
/pub/usenet/news.answers/Intel-Unix-X-faq and .../unix-faq.
|
|
|
|
Only if you have a posting that is not more appropriate for one of the other
|
|
Linux groups - ie it is not a question, not about the future development of
|
|
Linux, not an announcement or bug report and not about system administration -
|
|
should you post to comp.os.linux.misc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comments on this posting are welcomed - please email me !
|
|
--
|
|
Ian Jackson <ijackson@nyx.cs.du.edu> (urgent email: iwj10@phx.cam.ac.uk)
|
|
2 Lexington Close, Cambridge, CB4 3LS, England; phone: +44 223 64238
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: einstein@hogbbs.scol.pa.us (Huan Chang)
|
|
Subject: new machine to linux or not?!?!?!?!
|
|
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 94 13:16:10 EDT
|
|
|
|
Hey every one, um I d'no if this is good topic but on my new
|
|
66mhz machine with 540 hard disk I would like to install some thing
|
|
better than DOS and Windows. I will of course get OS/2 to run all of my
|
|
DOS applications. But what programs are out there for Linux to run on a
|
|
read PC(very personal computer, no networking other than a modem used
|
|
once a weak to read usenet off a not so unix BBS.) Or better yet, I
|
|
should say I'll have a partition of 100 meg and use a disk doubler(dos)
|
|
and another 200 some for the os/2 partition, but DO I realy want to use
|
|
up 100 megs to get Linux?(Of course I want Gnu C and Xffree.. I may even
|
|
get two copies of C one for OS/2 and one for the Linux.)
|
|
|
|
Oh.. back to the original question. Why Linux, can some one
|
|
convince me that Linux has the software(games, wordprocessing...free
|
|
ofcourse) to suport it? Other than that I love a Un*x type OS, as a
|
|
matter of fact I am even going to make my OS/2 look and feel like
|
|
Linux(hm.....)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
** 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-Misc-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Misc@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
|
|
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
|
|
|
|
End of Linux-Misc Digest
|
|
******************************
|