Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #723
From: Digestifier <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 8 Sep 94 00:13:19 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #723, Volume #2                 Thu, 8 Sep 94 00:13:19 EDT

Contents:
  Re: ATI Mach64 Alpha driver Arrived:!!!!!! (Harald Milz)
  Re: Looking for Telnet Source (Harald Milz)
  Re: Send me your xFree86 benchmarks (Harald Milz)
  TIA - Makes Slip From Reg SHell (Segal Gad)
  Re: Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support (Dances With Geeks)
  CD Installation HELP !!! (Aditya Mishra)
  Re: [INFO WANTED] C/SLIP vs. PPP (Richard Lindner)
  Re: Needed: Details on working UPS/Deamon shutdown systems. (John Lellis)
  Re: Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support (Joe Buck)
  Re: Linux BBS Software (Aris Stathakis)
  Re: 486dx4 vs Pentium 60 (Peter Hahn)
  Needed: Details on working UPS/Deamon shutdown systems. (John Antram)
  Re: OS/2 vs. Unix Which one is better and why??? (Darin Johnson)
  Setting up term for everyone on system. (C.W. Southern)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Harald Milz)
Subject: Re: ATI Mach64 Alpha driver Arrived:!!!!!!
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 17:05:26 GMT

In comp.os.linux.misc, [email-masked] wrote:
> I found Alpha driver from MIT on sunsite.unc.edu in directory
> /pub/Linux/X11/X-servers, file name is XF_SVGA_Mach64.tar.gz
> Make sure you read Readme file after un-taring the file.
> I have it nd it works with no problems.

Oh, I just read the lsm entry. Seems it does not do what everyone 
would expect:

Title        = XFree86 SVGA driver for ATI Mach64 Graphics Cards
Version      = 0.00 (Alpha version)
Desc1        = Mods to the standard ATI driver to support the Mach64.  This
Desc2        = is _not_ an accelerated X server.  It is _not_ tested except
Desc3        = that I am using it right now.
Desc4        =
Desc5        =
Author       = William Shubert
AuthorEmail  = [email-masked]

3:-O

-- 
The human race has one really effective weapon, and that is laughter.
                -- Mark Twain
-- 
Harald Milz ([email-masked])      WWW: http://www.ix.de/editors/hm.html
iX Multiuser Multitasking Magazine      phone +49 (511) 53 52-377
Helstorfer Str. 7, D-30625 Hannover     fax   +49 (511) 53 52-378
Opinions stated herein are my own, not necessarily my employer's.
d herein are my own, not necessarily my employer's.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Harald Milz)
Subject: Re: Looking for Telnet Source
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 17:11:34 GMT

In comp.os.linux.misc, Jason Rimmer ([email-masked]) wrote:
>       I've looked through most of Sunsite, and I can't fin the source 
> for Linux Telnet anywhere!  Any clue where this beast lies?

It's somewhere in the rest you didn't check:

/pub/Linux/system/Network/sunacm/NetKit-B-0.02/telnet.tar.gz

-- 
In 1914, the first crossword puzzle was printed in a newspaper.  The
creator received $4000 down ... and $3000 across.
-- 
Harald Milz ([email-masked])      WWW: http://www.ix.de/editors/hm.html
iX Multiuser Multitasking Magazine      phone +49 (511) 53 52-377
Helstorfer Str. 7, D-30625 Hannover     fax   +49 (511) 53 52-378
Opinions stated herein are my own, not necessarily my employer's.

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.i386unix
From: [email-masked] (Harald Milz)
Subject: Re: Send me your xFree86 benchmarks
Reply-To: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 17:14:17 GMT

In comp.os.linux.misc, Derrik Walker II ([email-masked]) wrote:
> Since I could not Find a master list of video cards/chip sets, I would 
> like everyone who has done so to send me the following infromation:

> 1. the make of your video card
> 2. the model of your video card
> 3. the chip set of your video card.
> 4. the Bus type of the card.
> 5. your CPU type and speed (ie 384dx-40, or 486dlc-33)
> 6. and obviously the xfree86 bench mark.
                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
What's that? 

-- 
Anybody with money to burn will easily find someone to tend the fire.
-- 
Harald Milz ([email-masked])      WWW: http://www.ix.de/editors/hm.html
iX Multiuser Multitasking Magazine      phone +49 (511) 53 52-377
Helstorfer Str. 7, D-30625 Hannover     fax   +49 (511) 53 52-378
Opinions stated herein are my own, not necessarily my employer's.
ssarily my employer's.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Segal Gad )
Subject: TIA - Makes Slip From Reg SHell
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 19:43:18 GMT

 hi guyz.
 yes its true this tia makes a SLIP connection from a regular unix shell.
 its outrageous. but doesnt have real SLIP posib.
 1) your address doesnt change. :(
 2) noone can ftp/telnet to you.
well. the rest is regular. and for muy opiniun better then term cause you dont need special term progs for it liek irc for term. u just take a client you like 
.. 
  well thats :)
       
   PS> almost forgot. to get it gopher to marketplace.ocm
                    this damn VI!   marketplace.com
 and go to the first section. about TIA.
 :) thats it.
  follow on from there.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Dances With Geeks)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support
Date: 7 Sep 1994 19:54:51 GMT

On 5 Sep 1994 22:04:13 GMT, H.J. Lu ([email-masked]) wrote:

> Today after I talked with RMS on the phone, I learned that the GNU project
> is preparing for a Linux/GNU distribution based on the Debian distribution,
> which is due in a few weeks. I think noone should call GNU is a vaporware
> now since the Linux/GNU system is running on x86. I was told if Linux had
> came along be fore hurd was started Linux would have been used as the GNU
> kernel. Now since hurd is well on the way, it should not be aborted. It looks
> like porting Linux to other platforms may pick up some steams as well as the
> work on the Linux kernel. I am glad to see it finnally happen.

I don't want to rain on the parade, but I hope we do *not* start considering
ourselves a GNU system.  We use the GNU software, it's wonderful stuff, I
like it, but we also use whatever fits in with the Linux philosophy, which
is much more unconstrained and much less ideological than the GNU
philosophy, IMO.  There are licensing problems in the standard GNU approach,
again IMO, involving the linkage of libraries into applications.  I'm not
saying the GNU approach is wrong, just that it's not as open as it might be.

I'm glad to see that the Debian release is moving along--but not because I
think Linux development should be subsumed into it.  On the contrary, I
think the strength of development for Linux is that there are a number of
competing, independent threads which serve to strengthen the whole tapestry. 
I would hate to see that change, as it would inevitably do if we became part
of a less-flexible structure.

I very much appreciate the amount of work that has gone into GNU software,
and the quality of that software.  I use it all the time!  But I don't think
that recognition by FSF is the primary measure of the success of Linux. 
They are different things entirely.

Mainstreaming support for Linux in GCC is another issue entirely, BTW....if
Linux is used extensively in the community, it probably makes sense for both
Linux people and GNU people for both groups to work closely together....

Anyway, if my message isn't reasonably diplomatic, I better apologize in
advance, I've had nine hours of sleep in two days and really need about
twice that :) :)

lilo

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Aditya Mishra)
Subject: CD Installation HELP !!!
Date: 7 Sep 1994 12:08:07 -0500

This is for a DESPERATE friend! Please enlighten her....

Subject: HELP!! "Read-only file system" message from Linux Installation
I had posted this question before, but got no response.  I hope someone
will respond because I  am stuck on my installation.  I have already
read all the latest linux FAQ files, but that problem was not addressed.

I am trying to install slackware(v1.1.1) from cdrom.
I partitioned my hard drive with the following configuration:
/dev/hda1  205096(blocks)  dos
/dev/hda2  82152            linux native
/dev/hda3  10584            linux swap
/dev/hda4  112896           linux native
I ran setup and followed the prompts, but the installation failed with the 
following messages:

"Done formatting device /dev/hda2...
 Root partition mounted.
/bin setup: cannot create /mnt/fstab: read-only file system".
Question:
How do I go about making my / filesystem read-write?

I am running a 486D66 with 420M hard drive and Creative Soundblaster Card
and CD-ROM drive.

Thanks in advance.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Richard Lindner)
Subject: Re: [INFO WANTED] C/SLIP vs. PPP
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 08:17:00 GMT

Frederic POTTER ([email-masked]) wrote:
: In fact, it depends on the quality of you telephone line.

: 1) Your line is a good one, so they are not numerous errors, SLIP is faster
: because it doesn't contain any errors correction protocols as PPP does.

: 2) Your line is poor and you are using SLIP, so the packet correction is made 
: via TCP/IP standards procedure, which is much slower than serial line dedicated PPP 
: error correction procedures

aahh - but what if mnp4 or v42 is active? - would slip then be faster?
enquiring minds are wondering .....

-- 
Richard Lindner - System Manager        Upper Murray Public Access Unix
[email-masked]                PO Box 1555, Wodonga, Vic. 3689, Oz
Data: 060 208773   Fax: 060 562105      Voice: 060 562072 (bh) 060 208813 (ah)

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (John Lellis)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin
Subject: Re: Needed: Details on working UPS/Deamon shutdown systems.
Date: 7 Sep 1994 17:13:42 GMT

John Antram ([email-masked]) wrote:
:       Hello all, I am in need of details on working powerd/UPS etc systems
: we are planning on having at least 2 machines up at all times, and I'd like
: to have them shut down in a healthy way. Please E-mail if possible, if people
: would like, I'll post a summery.

There is a BUPS-HOWTO on sunsite describing how to do this with an APC UPS.

--

John Lellis ([email-masked])

--
... Our continuing mission: To seek out knowledge of C, to explore
strange UNIX commands, and to boldly code where no one has man page 4.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Joe Buck)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Linux is a GNU system and the DWARF support
Date: 8 Sep 1994 00:21:55 GMT

[email-masked] (Dances With Geeks) writes:
>There are licensing problems in the standard GNU approach,
>again IMO, involving the linkage of libraries into applications.  I'm not
>saying the GNU approach is wrong, just that it's not as open as it might be.

If there are licensing problems in the GNU approach, then Linux suffers
from them.  The kernel is under the GPL, the C library is under the LGPL,
certain key files always linked in, like libgcc.a and crt0.S have special
exceptions to avoid bringing whole applications under the GPL.  These
statements are true of both Linux and the future Hurd.  There is no
difference, Linux is using every single GNU licensing convention exactly
as the FSF intended.

The only difference I can see is attitude: the FSF people talk about
software hoarders, grumble a lot but then adjust their licenses where
needed (example: the stream classes in libg++ moved from the LGPL to the
"as a special exception" no-restrictions license), and the Linux people
are more relaxed about the whole thing.  But legally, it's *exactly* the
same: if you have problems with the GNU licensing approach you'll need
to abandon Linux and join up with the BSD folks.

-- 
-- Joe Buck     <[email-masked]>
Posting from but not speaking for Synopsys, Inc.
***** Stamp out junk e-mail spamming!  If someone sends you a junk e-mail
***** ad just because you posted in comp.foo, boycott their company.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Aris Stathakis)
Subject: Re: Linux BBS Software
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 1994 11:57:17 GMT

>In article <[email-masked]>, Wayne Hodgen said something like:
> The problem with all the BBS software out there is that it's all run on the
> Internet news/mail services lines. A lot of people (me included) run FIDO
> at home. I have Internet here at work but I can't afford it at home. I just
> spent 4 days installing the latest Slackware, getting dail-ins working and
> trying out 8 BBS packages, none of which I found satisfactory.

> OK, you say, you don't like it, write your own. Well, I'm seriously
> considering it. A student of ours has written a FIDO scanner/tosser. A FIDO
> editor using ncurses and is working on a simple mailer (Binkley is a config
> nightmare). Is anyone already working on a FIDO BBS for Linux? Does anyone
> know if theres Free source examples of how to do such a thing? Who would
> be interested in it?

Try UniBoard.  It isn't free, but it is cheap.  He does have support for FIDO
(in Beta).  You can get it from ftp.wariat.org:/pub/uniboard.

BTW, source ISN'T available.  But it does work well and is very configurable :-)

Aris

-- 
Aris Stathakis            Tel: +27 11 887 1040       Snail Mail:  
SCO ACE / Novell CNE      Fax: +27 11 887 5158       P.O. Box 781228
M&PD (Pty) Ltd.           Fax: +27 11 786 6647       Sandton, 2146
E-Mail: [email-masked]    Cell:+27 83 601 0206       R.S.A.

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Peter Hahn)
Subject: Re: 486dx4 vs Pentium 60
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 15:10:20 GMT

[email-masked] (Dan Pop) writes:

>In <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Peter Hahn) writes:

>>[email-masked] (Zach) writes:
>>
>>>Hi i'm looking to get a system to run Linux but was wondering if
>>>someone could advise me on weather I should get a 486dx4/100 or a
>>>Pentium 60. The 2 systems I am looking at cost almost exactly the same
>>>but the 486 has a 520 mb SCSI hd while the pentium has a 420 ide.
>>
>>>Any thoughts?
>>
>>Two arguments apperare in mind: First, a Pentium-60 benchmarks at 61 SpecInt,
>>a dx4-100 at 52 -- can't remember floating point exactly, but the difference
>>is tendencially even bigger. Second the memory interface of the Pentium is
>>much better than the 486 one. It is 64 Bit wide and knows of write back
>>cache.
>>
>>  There are even more reasons, but this two would be sufficient for me.

>You seem to ignore the fact that the performance of a Linux box does not
>depend exclusively on the cpu speed. The hard disk performance is also
>essential, and here the 486 box is at a clear advantage. The extra disk
>space is a bonus, too. 

>So, it's not going to be an easy choice :-)

Well, I didn't realise the SCSI vs. IDE tradeoff. There is not much of a
difference, if you keep the builtin 520MB disk, as it is slower than the
average IDE interface. But I admit the lack of upgrading to better backup
devices and real fast disks.

  On the other hand SCSI isn't always fast: my 1542 performs maximum 2MB
per second linear read/write with both disks.

  However, a Pentium board without builtin SCSI support is pretty seldom,
though.

Peter
-- 
Peter Hahn                                                         Peterstr. 26
     52062 Aachen                                                Germany
          [email-masked]   [email-masked]
                             Voice: +49 241 37151

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin
From: [email-masked] (John Antram)
Subject: Needed: Details on working UPS/Deamon shutdown systems.
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 15:03:51 GMT

        Hello all, I am in need of details on working powerd/UPS etc systems
we are planning on having at least 2 machines up at all times, and I'd like
to have them shut down in a healthy way. Please E-mail if possible, if people
would like, I'll post a summery.

        -John

------------------------------

From: [email-masked] (Darin Johnson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. Unix Which one is better and why???
Date: 08 Sep 1994 01:36:16 GMT

> In article <[email-masked]>,  <[email-masked]> wrote:
> >Well maybe, but hey he
> >can't run Microsoft Office, or use multimedia or even run the DOS apps
> >required for engineering classes here.

Required?  What kind of repressive regime requires using DOS
apps (that have been shown to cause insanity in lab inhabitants)?

If they supply the computers, that is one thing; but if a valid
alternative is found that should be allowed.

> >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.

The first thing to learn - write it down if you must - is that
the meaning of productivity depends upon the person speaking.
If you define productivity as being able to run certain DOS apps,
you might also go and stat an even noisier flame war by claiming
that Macs are unproductive.

If the productivity in question is learning about computers
and computer science, then your friends approach is much better
than sticking to OS/2 and not asking needless questions.

> >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.

Because it's common and programmer friendly.  Of course, many
places just have them as their main machines that anyone can use;
but don't get upset if you do your assignments in DOS or something
else (for programming, the TA should be able to get the source code
and recompile it though).  They can write their reports in whatever
system they want.  UNIX machines are available all over and in
many varieties, and in modern times, is very affordable for the
student.

UNIX is what the real world in CS uses.  CS people are NOT USERS!
Being able to run DOS apps is almost useless (most that I know that
care about apps would prefer macs anyway).  UNIX machines are
multi-user, very network friendly (can you use the school's OS/2
machines from home, or across the country?).  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
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?"

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.

> >2) Isn't the lack of "killer" apps a good reason not to use Unix?

This just shows an incredible bias.  Personally, I've seen very
little under DOS (except games) that I cared to run.

"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.  If you do desktop video, then it's Amiga.  If youbest.  If you do desktop video, then it's Amiga.  If you want
CAD, it is probably msdos (I think).

If you have a particular app that you need, and that drives your
choice of computer - great!  But don't complain because other
people don't have the same needs you do.

> >My reasoning is that he should just stick to learning about computers in a
> >conventional way (reading mags and books and online literature, and taking
> >classes) rather than wasting his time by fooling around with Unix.

Why?  You went to school to get an education, so don't get flustered
if someone wants to get one instead of just sliding through.  Will
your resume read "did only the minimum necessary work for my degree"?
Sheesh, if your friend takes up bagpipes, will you complain to him
that this has nothing to do with his major, and that guitar is a
better choice anyway?

People who learn things the conventional (easy) way are the most
annoying ones to CS people, since they end up with only a superficial
knowledge without knowing this (or not caring).  Besides, the current
conventional ways to learn computers are designed for USERS or the
mass market, and if you want to go beyond that, conventional ways
fail.  Heck, there aren't any decent programming magazines anymore,
so that route is out (note that I said "decent").  As far as books,
stores are full of "Blah for Dummies" and such.

> >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?

You can't learn ANYTHING well without fooling around with it!!
You get only superficial knowledge.  With computers, the most
common symptom is the tendency to shove everything into the
templates already learned - and the first time something doesn't
fit into expectations (such as a new error message) that person
doesn't know how to procede.

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?

I am really glad you are in engineering and not in education.
--
Darin Johnson
[email-masked]
    "I wonder what's keeping Guybrush?"

------------------------------

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.admin
From: [email-masked] (C.W. Southern)
Subject: Setting up term for everyone on system.
Reply-To: [email-masked] ()
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 1994 17:41:43 GMT

I want to setup term on my Linux box so everyone on my system can
use it.  Right now I have it setup for me only.  But I know that there
is a way set it up so more then one user can share the socket to 
connect to the remote machine.  Maybe run term as root... something 
like that?  Can anyone help.

chris.
[email-masked]

-- 
   ___                   Internet: [email-masked] 
  /    /           __              [email-masked]              
 /    /---  /-- . (      BITNET:   CWS9669@RITVAX  
 \__ /   / /   / __)     UUCP:     !uucp!rit!cws9669 

------------------------------

** 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: [email-masked]

You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:

    Internet: [email-masked]

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
******************************