602 lines
25 KiB
Plaintext
602 lines
25 KiB
Plaintext
From: Digestifier <Linux-Development-Request@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu>
|
|
To: Linux-Development@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
|
Reply-To: Linux-Development@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu
|
|
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 94 04:13:09 EDT
|
|
Subject: Linux-Development Digest #160
|
|
|
|
Linux-Development Digest #160, Volume #2 Mon, 12 Sep 94 04:13:09 EDT
|
|
|
|
Contents:
|
|
Re: WARNING about shadow-mk package (John F. Haugh II)
|
|
Re: Doom Music + PAS-16 (Tracy S. Schuhwerk)
|
|
Re: Linux console to SCO comp. prob (Stephen Harris)
|
|
Linux hangs on low speeds. :-( (Eugene Tyurin)
|
|
RARP problem in 1.1.50 build ("Stephen Davies")
|
|
Re: DEC EtherWorks 3 (Stephen Thompson)
|
|
Re: Multiprocessing Pentium Systems (Scott Lawrence Lynn)
|
|
Re: Don't use Linux?! (Kay Hamacher)
|
|
Re: File locking--gurus please read. :) (Ben Eng)
|
|
Re: Survey: who wants f77,cc,c++,hpf for linux? (Harri Pasanen)
|
|
Re: Doom Music + PAS-16 (Hannu Savolainen)
|
|
Re: Developing Distributed Filesystems for Linux? ("Derrick J. Brashear")
|
|
Re: DOOM for Linux problem - help. (Patrick Reijnen)
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.help
|
|
From: jfh@rpp386 (John F. Haugh II)
|
|
Subject: Re: WARNING about shadow-mk package
|
|
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
|
|
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 23:07:45 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <im14u2c.778889543@cegt201> im14u2c@cegt201.bradley.edu (Joe Zbiciak) writes:
|
|
>The original /bin/login will deny any logged in user from using
|
|
>the -f (username) option if they lack sufficient privledge. Period.
|
|
>Indeed, the only reason -froot was a problem was that /bin/login
|
|
>determined that the "active user" calling /bin/login was indeed root
|
|
>and therefore had permission to use the -f switch. Any user, once
|
|
>logged in, cannot use the -f option unless that user is indeed root.
|
|
>
|
|
>For those persons interested in verifying this statement, log in
|
|
>as a regular user and type "/bin/login -f root" or "/bin/login -froot"
|
|
>and see what happens. You'll not become root. The problem was in
|
|
>rlogin and console logins, where /bin/login was being invoked by
|
|
>root itself, rather than being invoked as suid-root. Apparently, the
|
|
>old /bin/login uses getuid() instead of geteuid() to determine the
|
|
>real user id of the user executing the program.
|
|
|
|
The easiest solution is to use the patch I posted several months
|
|
ago and apply that to lmain.c. It closes the hole correctly and
|
|
doesn't require any extra wrapper commands.
|
|
|
|
Just to echo my disdain for binary-only distributions, I had a friend
|
|
who recently was forced to buy a Linux CD pretty much because the
|
|
spare CD I have was binary-only. So far the only people making money
|
|
off of Linux are the CD shops.
|
|
--
|
|
John F. Haugh II [ NRA-ILA ] [ Kill Barney ] !'s: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
|
|
Ma Bell: (512) 251-2151 [GOP][DoF #17][PADI][ENTJ] @'s: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org
|
|
There are three documents that run my life: The King James Bible, the United
|
|
States Constitution, and the UNIX System V Release 4 Programmer's Reference.
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: tracy@amiga.iac.net (Tracy S. Schuhwerk)
|
|
Subject: Re: Doom Music + PAS-16
|
|
Date: 11 Sep 1994 23:26:38 GMT
|
|
Reply-To: tracy.schuhwerk@amiga.iac.net
|
|
|
|
In article <34vte3$dfl@nic.umass.edu>, cmay@titan.ucs.umass.edu (Christopher M. May) writes:
|
|
|> Hi, Has anyone gotten the music to work in DOOM?
|
|
|> I've seen 1 person post with a SB16 who said it worked.
|
|
|> I thought doom was working perfectly, until I remembered there's
|
|
|> music too :)
|
|
|>
|
|
|> My card passes the "fmtest" included in the sndkit.
|
|
|> (After I load the general midi patches... is this necessary?)
|
|
|>
|
|
|> Also, do I have to compile in the MPU-401 support?
|
|
|> The PAS-16 emulates an MPU-401.
|
|
|> Is the DOOM code sensitive to Soundblaster IRQ?
|
|
|>
|
|
|> Does the Music go out /dev/sequencer or /dev/midi, or /dev/dsp?
|
|
|>
|
|
|> Finally, does anyone with a PAS-16 have music working?
|
|
|
|
If it is anything like the SGI version (which it is supposed to be),
|
|
there is no music...
|
|
|
|
-- Tracy Schuhwerk
|
|
Tracy.Schuhwerk@amiga.iac.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: hsw1@papa.attmail.com (Stephen Harris)
|
|
Subject: Re: Linux console to SCO comp. prob
|
|
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 21:11:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
Keith Smith (keith@ksmith.com) wrote:
|
|
: In article <CvpLB7.HwK@papa.attmail.com>,
|
|
: I wrote:
|
|
|
|
: >If you don't like them, then build your own keymap file and termcap entry.
|
|
|
|
: Bad idea in most cases. Ususally breaks bunches of stuff. Of course
|
|
|
|
Such as? I'd like to know, so that if/when I need to remap my keys then I'll
|
|
know what programs will cause problems. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
: >The point is that programs can't make assumptions about keyboard maps.
|
|
|
|
: Ahh, but they do, they do.
|
|
|
|
I haven't seen many - infact I don't think I've seen any! The "problem" with
|
|
a unix system is that the terminal at the end of the wire can be of any type.
|
|
The only way a program can know is to use the $TERM variable. I have yet to
|
|
see ANY program which has hard coded key combinations, although I've seen
|
|
plenty with their own variation on termcap - generally complete with a VT
|
|
keyboard entry.
|
|
|
|
: >: 'Splain where F22 is on a VT100 will ya?
|
|
|
|
: Hmmm, you need a 122 key IBM keyboard with an extra row of function keys
|
|
: (f13...f24) above f1...f12. "common" (hahahahahaha) practice uses
|
|
: shift-f1 thru shift-f12 for f13 to f24 respective.
|
|
|
|
Great, so a common PC keyboard doesn't have F22, so you complain that a VT
|
|
doesn't have the same? Huh?
|
|
|
|
: end-all of keyboard layouts. Just that the Fkeys sent SANE logical
|
|
: sequences of keys.
|
|
|
|
I'd rather be able to distringuish between all the keys. 'sane' is matter of
|
|
opinion.
|
|
|
|
: compatable market. Man those ADM-3's, wy-50/60/120/150/350/325/etc
|
|
: televideo 9xx, altos, link, etc are EVERYWHERE.
|
|
|
|
Almost everywhere :-) I dont' have any in my London office (but I do in my
|
|
Greek office, which is why I hate them).
|
|
|
|
: >2) Software with keyboard sequence limits is severly broken.
|
|
|
|
: There are _ALWAYS_ limits. Using the entire RAM resource of a machine
|
|
: to map keycode sequences would seem to me to be rather wasteful yes?
|
|
|
|
Come on, make sense. Dynamically allocating space required for the keys
|
|
based on the definitions in the terminfo/cap databases would mean that
|
|
the entire RAM resources of a machine wouldn't be used. (Unless the
|
|
termcap string was so long that you couldn't feasibly access it anyway!)
|
|
|
|
: Additionally long keyboard sequences are increasingly time consuming to
|
|
: decode, and require longer detect timeout intervals ESPECIALLY when used
|
|
|
|
5 keys at 9600 baud take 5ms approx to send. 3 keys take 3ms. Gee, really
|
|
gonna notice the 2ms difference! Modem quality is sufficiently variable anyway
|
|
to make this point moot. A quick line glitch and you could wait a second
|
|
anyway!
|
|
|
|
: resource, but to save going nuts I avoided sorting the sequences into a
|
|
: tree and simply implemented a linear in-stream compare with shift
|
|
: holding chars in a queue of the same size as the longest key sequence
|
|
: you are decodeing. Real pain in the ass, and it'll really beat the
|
|
: machine if you define a few hundred 10 character Fkey sequences.
|
|
|
|
Whereas if you had programmed it more efficiently then you would have had
|
|
a longer startup time, but quicker key decoding. Lazy programming 'to save
|
|
going nuts' is just more bad programming.
|
|
|
|
: The main problem with longer sequences is TIME. With the VT Fkey layout
|
|
: the lead-in key is also a commonly used key used to back up one step in
|
|
|
|
Yes, this is one fault of the VT keyboard. Does make decoding harder, but
|
|
still at least each key is uniquely decodeable! Proper programming, and the
|
|
simple fact that users generally type ahead mean that this is not such a
|
|
great problem as it appears.
|
|
|
|
Wonder how this turned into a slagging keyboard conversation? I still maintain
|
|
my conclusion of my last message in this thread.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
rgds
|
|
Stephen
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: gene@dio.physics.sunysb.edu (Eugene Tyurin)
|
|
Subject: Linux hangs on low speeds. :-(
|
|
Date: 12 Sep 1994 01:02:24 GMT
|
|
Reply-To: gene@insti.physics.sunysb.edu (Eugene Tyurin)
|
|
|
|
Hi netters,
|
|
|
|
When I login into a Linux system (1.0.9 or 1.1.18) from my home
|
|
2400 baud modem via phone->Ethernet gateway at school, my session
|
|
gets frozen if I try to dump a large amount of text onto screen
|
|
(e.g. try to read man pages), unless I set stty 2400 (the default
|
|
for ttyp is 9600). I'd consider this a bug, because SGI machines
|
|
never do this to me although they also have 9600 baud default.
|
|
--
|
|
Eugene Tyurin ( ITP, Stony Brook Univ. )
|
|
E-mail: gene@insti.physics.sunysb.edu ( MIME mail is welcome! )
|
|
WWW: http://www.physics.sunysb.edu:80/~gene/plan.html
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: "Stephen Davies" <scldad@sdc.com.au>
|
|
Subject: RARP problem in 1.1.50 build
|
|
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 94 19:07:21 PDT
|
|
|
|
The 1.1.50 patch adds the definition of the arphdr structure to if_arp.h
|
|
but leaves it in rarp.c so that a redefinition error occurs during make.
|
|
|
|
|
|
========================================================================
|
|
Stephen Davies Consulting scldad@sdc.com.au
|
|
Adelaide, South Australia. Voice: 61-8-2728863
|
|
Computing & Network solutions. Fax : 61-8-2741015
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: steve@snopc50.stl.dec.com (Stephen Thompson)
|
|
Subject: Re: DEC EtherWorks 3
|
|
Date: 12 Sep 1994 02:10:15 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <CvCKuI.1nn@info.swan.ac.uk>
|
|
iialan@iifeak.swan.ac.uk (Alan Cox) wrote:
|
|
|
|
> >Actually, someone from dec has a driver for freebsd for this card. (I've
|
|
> >included the post at the end of this message.) Perhaps someone in the linux
|
|
> >community could use it to develop a linux driver...
|
|
> Whats wrong with the current depca driver, this seems to cover the same
|
|
> cards (DEPCA, DE100, DE200 Turbo, DE201 Turbo, DE202 Turbo, DE210, DE422).
|
|
> The DE203,4,5 are apparently a different custom ASIC.
|
|
|
|
There is now a etherworks 3 driver for linux, it works very well as I have been using it for about 2 weeks now without
|
|
fail
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
Stephen Thompson - South Pacific Technical Support
|
|
Digital Equipment Corporation (Australia) Pty. Limited A.C.N. 000 446 800
|
|
DTN: 730-5566
|
|
+61-2-561-5566
|
|
(steve@snopc50.stl.dec.com)
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: slynn@pyramid.com (Scott Lawrence Lynn)
|
|
Subject: Re: Multiprocessing Pentium Systems
|
|
Date: 11 Sep 1994 03:08:57 -0700
|
|
|
|
In article <HUGH.94Sep11203646@hugh.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz>,
|
|
Hugh Emberson <hugh@hugh.cosc.canterbury.ac.nz> wrote:
|
|
>>>>>> "David" == David Williams <dwwillia@mango.ucs.indiana.edu> writes:
|
|
>[chomp]
|
|
Ditto...
|
|
>
|
|
>The easy way is the way that SunOS 4.1.3 does it, or is rumoured to do
|
|
>it. Allegedly 4.1.3 has a single spin lock around the entire kernel, so
|
|
>that only one processor can be executing inside the kernel at any time.
|
|
|
|
I've never looked at the SunOS 4.x.x kernel, but I can't imagine that it was
|
|
done this way. Spinlocks have timeouts on them, and you could easily have
|
|
a CPU wait for much too long due to the inherent possibility of starvation
|
|
that comes with a spinlock.
|
|
|
|
One way to handle SMP simply is to put spinlocks around all the kernel
|
|
data structures, or major subsystems. This will still probably take a
|
|
great deal of work to get it right, and it'll have problems.
|
|
It's a good start though.
|
|
|
|
>
|
|
>Would it be possible to do this with Linux?
|
|
>
|
|
>4.1.3 with its big spin lock seems to perform better than multithreaded
|
|
>Solaris 2.x on multiprocessor machines, though this is probably due to
|
|
>other problems with Slowaris.
|
|
This probably has more to do with Solaris 2.x being based on SVR4. For
|
|
starters SVR4 uses STREAMS instead of sockets! Also, SVR4 typically
|
|
eats more memory than BSD.
|
|
|
|
Scott Lynn
|
|
|
|
-m------- Scott L. Lynn slynn@pyramid.com
|
|
---mmm----- Pyramid Technology Corporation Voice: (408) 428-7305
|
|
-----mmmmm--- 3860 N. First Street Fax: (408) 428-8845
|
|
=======mmmmmmm= San Jose, CA 95134=1702
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: kay@lucie.wupper.de (Kay Hamacher)
|
|
Subject: Re: Don't use Linux?!
|
|
Date: 11 Sep 1994 12:46:59 GMT
|
|
|
|
In article <34pq45INNojt@sbusol.rz.uni-sb.de>, hightec@sbusol.rz.uni-sb.de (Michael Schumacher) writes:
|
|
|> Okay. Before you start sending me endless flames, I want to make sure
|
|
|> that you know that I *love* Linux. It's probably the best PC Un*x you
|
|
|> can find between here and the sun.
|
|
Yeah. So I think, too.
|
|
|
|
|> 2. Linux's libc tends to change its version number almost every week
|
|
|> (sometimes even more often). Even though changes of the minor
|
|
|> version number should not affect previous applications, they will
|
|
|> sometimes break them. This means for a company that they have to
|
|
|> debug the library in order to find a work-around (see 3.).
|
|
|> 3. The kernel versions change faster than the speed of light. If you
|
|
|> ask for a "stable" version, you'll be teached that there are two
|
|
|> versions: 1.0 (production) and 1.1 (hacker's paradise). Wanna have a
|
|
|> stable one? Get 1.0! Okay, but if I want to offer a commercial
|
|
|> product, it doesn't matter what kernel version *I* am using, but
|
|
|> what version is used by my potential *customers*! There's a reason
|
|
|> for 1.1: it is a bit faster, it supports more hardware, it provides
|
|
|> more features. As a result, most Linuxers traditionally pick up the
|
|
|> the newest kernel releases all the time - and usually end up in this
|
|
|> newsgroup, saying "this is broken", "that doesn't work anymore",
|
|
|> "can't compile", etc. (if you don't believe me, just exit this thread
|
|
|> for a moment and take a look at the other subjects). Besides other
|
|
|> disadvantages, this will definitely not convince companies of the
|
|
|> stability and usefulness of Linux!
|
|
So your conclusion must be : companies prevent techincal progress by developing
|
|
only stuff for accepted and wide spread hardware as they must orientate their
|
|
work to high numbers of users. Free software must not do such silly things.
|
|
|
|
|> 5. On the other hand, I can tell you how to make lots of money with Linux:
|
|
|> simply download the archives of tsx-11, sunsite, nic.funet.fi,
|
|
|> prep.ai.mit.edu and ftp.x.org, put them on a CDROM, call it "Dream Linux"
|
|
|> or similar, and sell if for US$35 per copy. It's that easy. Let's say,
|
|
|> an average user is looking for "the better OS" and wants to try out
|
|
|> Linux. He buys a "Dream Linux" CD - and is lost. Nothing works "out of
|
|
|> the box", no reasonable documentation is available, nor hotline support.
|
|
|> What will happen? I'm quite sure that most of these desperated people
|
|
|> will close the Linux chapter - forever.
|
|
That is the problem : much money without any work. Companies must say "Dream..."
|
|
or "best OS" as they compete against ecah other. That needs resources to
|
|
compete and so these resources can not do work on the product.
|
|
|
|
|> Quo vadis, Linux? Do we continue to like Linux "as is", or should we
|
|
|> change something in order to encourage companies to develop commercial, but
|
|
|> sophisticated end-user software for this beautiful OS? Do we continue to
|
|
|> keep Linux a powerful tool for wizards only, or do we want to see Linux
|
|
|> being used in offices and other commercial environments? If we *really*
|
|
|> want Linux to succeed, we *need* the companies and their commercial products!
|
|
|
|
But do we need business men using Linux ? I do not need them. I am happy
|
|
in using Linux for my personal needs and work (e.g. Mails,News,graphical stuff).
|
|
Linux has developed to this high standard without any commercial leading-strings.
|
|
So Linux is any argument *against* commercial software and not for symbiose with
|
|
it, IMHO. The power Linux gives me to do my work let my laught about any
|
|
Windows-user, as he is wasting the power of his PC.
|
|
How long has it take to develope Solaris or UnixWare ? Very long. Are they
|
|
better ? You gave the answer in your posting. So the true progress was done
|
|
by private people and not by companies. Linux as the best *NIX has a developing
|
|
time not as long as other PC-Unix had, but it is better. So, do we need commercial
|
|
software ? And even if Linus had not this great idea called Linux :
|
|
There is also Free-BSD.
|
|
|
|
The real problem is in the mind of most people : Everything which is good must
|
|
be very expensive! So Solaris with high prices must be better than UnixWare
|
|
which seems to be better than Linux, as Solaris is more expensive and more
|
|
packed as UnixWare which is indeed more expensive than Linux. Or see Windows :
|
|
It is not good, it is bad. But : 1) the companies see only the stupid customer
|
|
buying his first computer. So they say : "hey, let's get Windows. You can simply
|
|
move the mouse-pointer round and do everything" And why ? Because they want
|
|
to get their percentage of the Windows-price. No computer-dealer would say to
|
|
the normal customer : "Use Linux, it is better", as he earns no extra money with
|
|
this kind of software. and 2) that is the point of view : everything must be
|
|
orientated on the big sell-numbers and not on the performance.
|
|
It is similar to cars : profis know where to buy good stuff to tune their
|
|
car or to cause the car not to need such high volumes of gasoline. The
|
|
average user of the car does not exactly know what does this machine (as I do not
|
|
know this), but it works : Fine ! I have not the time to intensive my knowlege
|
|
about cars and it makes me no fun. But there are people having fun on doing
|
|
this. So why should there be no people having fun in compiling every week
|
|
a new kernel for the system they use ? It is not car-tuning it is simply
|
|
computer-tuning. What is wrong on this ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kay
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
==========================================================================
|
|
Kay Hamacher Phone : ++ 49 2332 80650
|
|
Milskotter Str. 19 Fax : ++ 49 2332 83518
|
|
58285 Gevelsberg InterNet: kay@lucie.wupper.de
|
|
Federal Republic of Germany - European Union
|
|
|
|
Viele Menschen sind zu gut erzogen, um mit vollem Mund zu sprechen,
|
|
aber sie haben keine Bedenken, es mit leerem Kopf zu tun. (Oscar Wilde)
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: ben@dragon.achilles.net (Ben Eng)
|
|
Subject: Re: File locking--gurus please read. :)
|
|
Date: 12 Sep 1994 02:41:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
Willis Boyce (wboyce@panix.com) wrote:
|
|
: I've been working recently on a DBMS project under Linux. My ultimate
|
|
: goal is to create a DBMS which compares favorably with commercial systems
|
|
: and which provides a very simple interface into C.
|
|
|
|
: After looking into various methods (I'm pretty new to Unix), I decided to
|
|
: use advisory file locks as my concurrency mechanism. These have two big
|
|
: advantages:
|
|
|
|
: 1. They allow me to use a decentralized approach to concurrency.
|
|
: 2. They have built-in deadlock detection.
|
|
|
|
: Unfortunately, the Linux 1.1.8 that I am running apparently doesn't
|
|
: support deadlock detection.
|
|
|
|
Have you considered sticking with non-blocking advisory file locks?
|
|
Often it is not necessary for a process to block on grabbing a lock,
|
|
if the process is able to deal with it properly. Additionally, your
|
|
processes can always avoid deadlocks by agreeing on an ordering
|
|
convention when applying locks to multiple files. (Say your
|
|
relations are identified by an internal numbering scheme, then you
|
|
would always apply non-blocking locks in ascending or decending
|
|
relation number order.)
|
|
|
|
I have found that relying on deadlock detection in the underlying
|
|
filesystem implementation has not been a pleasant experience. In
|
|
particular AFS does not implement deadlock detection at all (among
|
|
other file locking features that are also not implemented, or are
|
|
broken; ie., non-blocking locks).
|
|
|
|
But if you do decide upon implementing deadlock detection in the Linux
|
|
kernel, it would definitely be appreciated here.
|
|
|
|
Ben
|
|
--
|
|
e-mail: ben@achilles.net or ben@idc.com (Ben Eng)
|
|
UofT EngSci 9T2 ``We are all masochists here.''
|
|
Home: (613)-567-9983 Work: (613)-567-4740
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: pa@tekla.fi (Harri Pasanen)
|
|
Crossposted-To: comp.lang.fortran
|
|
Subject: Re: Survey: who wants f77,cc,c++,hpf for linux?
|
|
Date: 12 Sep 1994 06:19:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From: mcastle@umr.edu (Mike Castle)
|
|
|
|
In article <CvyynF.Lxp@news.cern.ch>, Dan Pop <danpop@cernapo.cern.ch> wrote:
|
|
>Could you post some examples where a commercial native compiler for x86
|
|
>produces _significantly_ faster codes than the free gcc?
|
|
|
|
IBM's C compilers under OS/2.
|
|
Watcom compilers under OS/2 and DOS (do they have unix versions?)
|
|
Zortech C compiler (I presume under OS/2 and DOS as well).
|
|
Most likely the Mark Williams C compiler (they produce better
|
|
compilers than operating systems (coherent)).
|
|
|
|
GCC is designed to be PORTABLE first, optimal last. In almost
|
|
all cases, a DECENT architecture specific compiler will be as
|
|
good as or beat GCC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'd like to see some actual data to verify this. In my own experience
|
|
GCC optimizes very well across most architectures. I have yet to see
|
|
a DOS compiler that would consistently beat GCC generated code. For
|
|
instance, DJGCC on msdos produces a PovRay raytracer that is very
|
|
similar in performace to Watcom compiled version.
|
|
|
|
On MIPS-based decstation, gcc nowadays beats MIPS native compiler, and
|
|
the MIPS-people have written a lot of papers about optimization.
|
|
|
|
If you post/mail some sample program, I can test gcc against native
|
|
compilers on various unix boxes, (Sparc, Alpha, HP-PA, MIPS).
|
|
|
|
Harri
|
|
--
|
|
======================================================
|
|
Harri Pasanen pa@tekla.fi
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: hannu@voxware.pp.fi (Hannu Savolainen)
|
|
Subject: Re: Doom Music + PAS-16
|
|
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 05:52:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
cmay@titan.ucs.umass.edu (Christopher M. May) writes:
|
|
|
|
>Hi, Has anyone gotten the music to work in DOOM?
|
|
|
|
>I've seen 1 person post with a SB16 who said it worked.
|
|
|
|
>I thought doom was working perfectly, until I remembered there's
|
|
>music too :)
|
|
|
|
>My card passes the "fmtest" included in the sndkit.
|
|
>(After I load the general midi patches... is this necessary?)
|
|
|
|
|
|
>Also, do I have to compile in the MPU-401 support?
|
|
There is nothing wrong in your configuration. XDOOM just doesn't
|
|
play music.
|
|
|
|
Hannu
|
|
--
|
|
=============================
|
|
Hannu Savolainen
|
|
hannu@voxware.pp.fi
|
|
"Don't use Windows since there is a door!"
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
From: "Derrick J. Brashear" <db74+@andrew.cmu.edu>
|
|
Crossposted-To: alt.filesystems.afs
|
|
Subject: Re: Developing Distributed Filesystems for Linux?
|
|
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 23:34:34 -0400
|
|
|
|
Excerpts from netnews.alt.filesystems.afs: 11-Sep-94 Re: Developing
|
|
Distributed .. by John F Carr@athena.mit.e
|
|
> So ask, what is the target customer for your filesystem software? Are you
|
|
> trying to link Linux users together, or trying to make Linux work better in
|
|
> an AFS environment? If you are looking for a distributed filesystem without
|
|
> concern for compatibility, do you care about non-Linux systems?
|
|
I don't even have a Linux box. My machine is a SPARC 1; I was hoping for
|
|
some sort of free, and more importantly, general, client software.
|
|
However, I have access to Linux machines, and I'm not unwilling to work
|
|
on this sort of thing.
|
|
|
|
-D
|
|
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
Crossposted-To: alt.games.doom,comp.os.linux.help
|
|
From: patrickr@cs.kun.nl (Patrick Reijnen)
|
|
Subject: Re: DOOM for Linux problem - help.
|
|
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 1994 06:33:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
In <34vid4$ifs@nic-nac.CSU.net> dane@nermal.santarosa.edu (Dane Jasper) writes:
|
|
|
|
>I am having a problem getting DOOM for Linux to run on one of my machines.
|
|
>On the 486/66 machines at school, things work just fine. It's very
|
|
>depressing not to be able to play DOOM at home!
|
|
|
|
>Here's what I get (system info follows):
|
|
|
|
># linuxxdoom
|
|
>linuxxdoom: using incompatible library '/usr/X386/lib/libXt.so.3.0.1'
|
|
> Desire minor version >= 1 and found 0
|
|
>linuxxdoom: using incompatible library '/usr/X386/lib/libX11.so.3.0.1'
|
|
> Desire minor version >= 1 and found 0
|
|
> DOOM System Startup v1.666
|
|
|
|
Looks like you need to upgrade you X environment to 2.2.1. Your libs are to old for linuxxdoom.
|
|
|
|
[..stuff deleted ..]
|
|
|
|
>The system is a 486/66 with 28 megs of ram and linux 1.0.9. X is version
|
|
>2.1, with the XF_SVGA server.
|
|
|
|
>Does anyone have any ideas? Is it the libs??
|
|
|
|
>Replies via email are appreciated - post as well if you think it would be of
|
|
>general interest.
|
|
|
|
>Dane
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Reijnen
|
|
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
************************* Patrick Reijnen *************************
|
|
* Department of Computer Science, Catholic University of Nijmegen *
|
|
* Email: patrickr@{sci,cs}.kun.nl *
|
|
* WWW: http://{atlas,zeus}.cs.kun.nl:4080/homepage.html *
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
** 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-Development-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU
|
|
|
|
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development) via:
|
|
|
|
Internet: Linux-Development@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-Development Digest
|
|
******************************
|