Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #730
From: Digestifier <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 94 02:13:16 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #730, Volume #2                Sat, 10 Sep 94 02:13:16 EDT

Contents:
  Re: DOOM, X, Linux, 320x200 video mode ?? (Bill C. Riemers)
  Re: DOOM (Re: 320x200 X resolution?) (Sam Oscar Lantinga)
  Re: DOOM (Re: 320x200 X resolution?) (Pat McManus)
  >>Cheap Ethernet Pocket adapter and driver source!<< (Dennis Director)
  Linux DOOM is out! (Caleb Epstein)
  Re: Digiboard on Linux (Daniel Brockhaus)
  Re: The snatchability factor (was Re: WABI vs (Mark A. Davis)
  Re: The snatchability factor (was Re: WABI v (Mark A. Davis)
  Re: OS/2 vs. Unix Which one is better and why??? (William Huang)
  DOOM linux with TERM support. (Christophe Person)
  Re: The snatchability factor (was Re: WABI vs (Martin Sohnius)
  Re: Will a math coprocessor REALLY help? (Tracy R. Reed)
  Re: Biz.comp.linux* (Pierre Uszynski)
  Xconfig for 320x200 or similar mode? (Benjamin Alman)
  Re: DOOM, X, Linux, 320x200 video mode ?? (Bill C. Riemers)

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

From: [email-masked] (Bill C. Riemers)
Crossposted-To: alt.games.doom
Subject: Re: DOOM, X, Linux, 320x200 video mode ??
Date: 09 Sep 1994 22:44:47 GMT
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>>>>> "Hans" == Hans Peter Verne <[email-masked]> 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..... :-(

    Hans> And now, how will I ever finish my ph.d. ??
I just downloaded a copy from sunsite.unc.edu.  I've noticed two major
problems:
  1. Things are mirror immaged at block level.  This makes most of the
     screen very difficult to view.  As an example letter A in ammow
     appears as
        _
       / \ 
       ___||
          ||
          ||
           ^--> i.e. half the leg of A is on the wrong side.

This problem is only present if I use the -2, -3, or -4 option.

  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.

Also I can't figure out how to use the VGA mode instead, of the x
mode.

    Hans> Followup-To: alt.games.doom

Sorry, that is not one of the alt newsgroups carried by my site.   In
general it is not a good idea to use a Followup-To: line from an
official newsgroup to an alt news group as you loss half of the readers.

                           Bill

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development
From: [email-masked] (Sam Oscar Lantinga)
Subject: Re: DOOM (Re: 320x200 X resolution?)
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 22:27:52 GMT

:  LINUX: An X version with 16-bit sound is running.  It'll likely
:  perform like a dog on mortal systems, but it's very smooth on my
:  DX/2 66.  At sunsite.unc.edu:/pub/Linux/Incoming/linxdoom.tgz.
:  May be moved.  Remember: it was just for fun and is not supported.
:  Do not send e-mail to tech support, please.

: Poor sunsite....

        To help take the load off of sunsite, I have it temporarily
on my machine dewdrop.water.ca.gov in /pub/doom/lnxdoom.tgz

Note that pixel doubling/tripling doesn't work, and sound only
works with a 16 bit soundcard.  (Anyone want to sell one cheap? *grin*)

Enjoy!

        -Sam

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

From: [email-masked] (Pat McManus)
Subject: Re: DOOM (Re: 320x200 X resolution?)
Date: 9 Sep 1994 23:22:49 GMT

[note c.o.l.d eliminated from distribution]

last time on comp.os.linux.development, [email-masked] said.. 
>:  LINUX: An X version with 16-bit sound is running.  It'll likely
>:  perform like a dog on mortal systems, but it's very smooth on my
>:  DX/2 66.  At sunsite.unc.edu:/pub/Linux/Incoming/linxdoom.tgz.
>:  May be moved.  Remember: it was just for fun and is not supported.
>:  Do not send e-mail to tech support, please.
>
>: Poor sunsite....
>
>       To help take the load off of sunsite, I have it temporarily
>on my machine dewdrop.water.ca.gov in /pub/doom/lnxdoom.tgz
>

i've done the same: ftp cunnin.res.wpi.edu /pub/linxdoom.tgz
I'll keep it there about a week..

>Note that pixel doubling/tripling doesn't work, and sound only
>works with a 16 bit soundcard.  (Anyone want to sell one cheap? *grin*)

the sounds are the same (with the 16bit..).. and in 640x480 the size
is very playable.. nice to be able to get in a quick doom session
without having to take the linux box off the net for it's ususal inet
services..

-Pat

-- 
Patrick R. McManus                                Computer Science 1996
NYSERNet, Inc.          [email-masked]      [email-masked]
Check out the cunnin.res.wpi.edu gopher, web, and ftp servers.
My loyalty is to the truth and my ideals; not to expediency or tradition.

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

From: [email-masked] (Dennis Director)
Subject: >>Cheap Ethernet Pocket adapter and driver source!<<
Date: 9 Sep 1994 16:14:13 GMT

I have recently purchased a "generic" pocket ethernet adapter
for my notebook.  It turns out to be an Accton EtherPocket-SP.
It costs less than $100, the barrier I was waiting to see
brocken.  It works well from DOS on the parallel port of my
notebook talking to my Linux machine.

What would be very nice, is the ability to boot Linux on the
notebook and use the pocket ethernet adapter from Linux.
The nice people at Accton in Taiwan have sent me the complete
assembly source of their packet driver for DOS.

I don't know how compatible this is with other pocket adapters,
but the information should all be there in the source.
Porting the driver is too much for me for now.

Anyone interested in getting a Linux driver to work for this?
Seems like many people would like notebook connectivity for
Linux for less than $100.   Thanks, [email-masked]

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

From: [email-masked] (Caleb Epstein)
Subject: Linux DOOM is out!
Date: 9 Sep 1994 15:13:24 GMT
Reply-To: [email-masked]

        Just when I thought I might start getting some work done, Id
releases the Linux port of DOOM!  Here's an excerpt from "finger
[email-masked]":

| LINUX: An X version with 16-bit sound is running.  It'll likely
| perform like a dog on mortal systems, but it's very smooth on my
| DX/2 66.  At sunsite.unc.edu:/pub/Linux/Incoming/linxdoom.tgz.
| May be moved.  Remember: it was just for fun and is not supported.
| Do not send e-mail to tech support, please.

        I'm trying to grab the files m'self right now, but sunsite is
*really* bogged down.  I guess everyone else has the same idea.  Good
luck, and happy Linux-DOOMing!

-- 
[ [email-masked] | Caleb Epstein | JP Morgan & Co. Incorporated ]

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

From: [email-masked] (Daniel Brockhaus)
Subject: Re: Digiboard on Linux
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 13:21:55 GMT

David Cabot ([email-masked]) wrote:
> I need to know if anyone has written a DigiBoard driver for linux yet.

Dumb DigiBoard cards are supported by the kernel, turn on BOCA support in
drivers/char/serial.c and set the card to addresses 100h, 108h etc.

Intelligent cards are being worked on as far as I know. I've no idea when
(and if) a driver will be available.

Bye, Daniel

PS.
Anyone patched the dumd driver to use the card's status register? Would 
speed things up a lot!

===========================================================================
|   Daniel Brockhaus     | Deserves it! I Daresay he does. Many that live |
| [email-masked]  | deserve death. And some that die deserve life. |
|                        | Can you give it to them? Then be not to eager  |
| GerWinNET Support Team | to deal out death in judgement!                |
===========================================================================

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

Crossposted-To: comp.sys.hp,comp.sys.hp.apps,comp.sys.sun.apps,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.apps,comp.unix.unixware
From: [email-masked] (Mark A. Davis)
Subject: Re: The snatchability factor (was Re: WABI vs
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 1994 12:05:04 GMT

[email-masked] (Steven R. Clark) writes:

>In article [email-masked], [email-masked] (Martin Sohnius) writes:
>> Thomas Tonino ([email-masked]) wrote:
>> : As regarding the making availabele of a 'copy to illegaly copy'
>> : wordperfect for Linux on Sunsite, I might want to call to your

>They are definately NOT interested in allowing people to pirate their software.
>They are also not interested in porting WP to Linux either. We have offered to
>help .. official word is .. don't call us, we'll call you .. and we were willing
>to pay for it too ...

There is no need for a Linux port of WordPerfect for Unix.  WordPerfect
for Unix already runs under Linux using ICBS/COFF.  Better to pester
WordPerfect for aknowledgement and support of using the SCO version on
Linux.

-- 
  /--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
  | Mark A. Davis     | Lake Taylor Hospital | Norfolk,VA (804)-461-5001x431 |
  | Director/SysAdmin | Information Systems  |    [email-masked]       |
  \--------------------------------------------------------------------------/

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

Crossposted-To: comp.sys.hp,comp.sys.hp.apps,comp.sys.sun.apps,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.apps,comp.unix.unixware
From: [email-masked] (Mark A. Davis)
Subject: Re: The snatchability factor (was Re: WABI v
Date: Fri, 09 Sep 1994 12:07:13 GMT

[email-masked] (Steven R. Clark) writes:

>In article [email-masked], [email-masked] (Andreas Helke) writes:
>> Thomas Tonino ([email-masked]) wrote:
>> : As regarding the making availabele of a 'copy to illegaly copy'
>> : wordperfect for Linux on Sunsite, I might want to call to your
>> : attention that in the past Wordperfect Netherlands approach to
>> : piracy has been something like 'It helps us sell'....
>> 
>> 
>> : So... maybe it would be a good idea... but it should look less official I think.
>> 
>> I think the original idea was a unsuported but free version recompiled to be
>> a linux only binary. This might indeed be a valuable marketing tool for the
>> commercial unix versions.

>Novell are not even interested in a commercial version of WP for Linux .. at least
>they were not when we asked them.

Again, there is no need for a Linux version of WP.  The SCO version runs
fine.... pester them for official support of running the SCO version
under Linux IBCS/COFF (which is a possibility); don't bother worrying
about a native Linux version because it WILL NOT HAPPEN.

-- 
  /--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
  | Mark A. Davis     | Lake Taylor Hospital | Norfolk,VA (804)-461-5001x431 |
  | Director/SysAdmin | Information Systems  |    [email-masked]       |
  \--------------------------------------------------------------------------/

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

From: [email-masked] (William Huang)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: OS/2 vs. Unix Which one is better and why???
Date: 9 Sep 94 19:31:42 GMT

My software runs better on Linux than on OS/2.

Details:

I installed all the gnu-stuff on OS/2.  The code I ran had a core
image of 4MBytes on SPARCs.  On OS/2 it was 10MBytes (I'm not sure
why I think it my be a lot of those gcc-lib/emx DLL's or something).
That plus 8MBytes for the OS/2 system core and my computer was
swapping like mad (I have only 16MBytes of RAM).  (I'd appreciate
it if an OS/2 expert can tell me if I'm doing something wrong).

OS/2 is horrible when it starts swapping.

I decided I could not do my work in OS/2 and installed Linux.  The
same program which required 4Mbytes on SPARC also took 4M on Linux,
and the kernel overhead, after recompiling, was only approx 250k.
On top of that, I did not have to convert my csh shell scripts to
REXX.   So now I'm more or less happy with Linux except I'm still
complaining because Linux will not let me run matlab for windows,
nor can I run Quicken while waiting for a process to complete
in the background.

Nothing is perfect I guess!  But if I wanted to do my work on OS/2
I would have to go out and buy a lot more memory.

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

From: [email-masked] (Christophe Person)
Crossposted-To: alt.games.doom,comp.os.linux.help
Subject: DOOM linux with TERM support.
Date: 9 Sep 1994 11:30:13 -0500

 Like you all know, DOOM linux is out.

 But what about a DOOM linux version that run with TERM ? It would be less
painfull that blocking your computer using the modem version. I don't know 
if it wouldn't be simpler to have a IHHD server supporting term instead.

Opened discussion....

 Also, is there any server on the internet that provide IHHD doom. I am probably
not the only one who don't know anybody to play with (even with the net version)
and would like to meet people from all over the world on the DOOM playground.

Christophe Person
Computational Neurobiology Lab

<a href="http://dirac.bcm.tmc.edu/tools/mailtochrisp.html">
Mail to me</a>

 

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

Crossposted-To: comp.sys.hp,comp.sys.hp.apps,comp.sys.sun.apps,comp.windows.x,comp.windows.x.apps,comp.unix.unixware
From: [email-masked] (Martin Sohnius)
Subject: Re: The snatchability factor (was Re: WABI vs
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 20:44:44 GMT

Steven R. Clark ([email-masked]) wrote:
: In article [email-masked], [email-masked] (Martin Sohnius) writes:
: > Thomas Tonino ([email-masked]) wrote:
: > : As regarding the making availabele of a 'copy to illegaly copy'
: > : wordperfect for Linux on Sunsite, I might want to call to your
: > : attention that in the past Wordperfect Netherlands approach to
: > : piracy has been something like 'It helps us sell'....
: > 
: > : So... maybe it would be a good idea... but it should look less official I think.
: > 
: > I would have my doubts whether Novell-Wordperfect Inc. still has
: > this attitude.  Why don't you try?  (But I would recommend a VERY good
: > legal insurance policy first.)
: > 

: They are definately NOT interested in allowing people to pirate their software.
: They are also not interested in porting WP to Linux either. We have offered to
: help .. official word is .. don't call us, we'll call you .. and we were willing
: to pay for it too ...

Over lunch today, I mentioned this thread to the guy who is in charge of
software piracy issues for Novell-Wordperfect in Europe.  His reaction was
"forward the thread to me".  (See above, re legal insurance.)

BTW, I understand that WP 6 for UnixWare is in beta.

--
                        +--------------------------------------------+
Martin Sohnius          | "It doesn't matter whether the cat is      |
Novell Labs Europe      |  black or white, as long as it catches     |
Bracknell, England      |  mice."      - Deng Xiaoping               |
+44-1344-724031          +--------------------------------------------+
                        (I speak for myself, not for Novell or anyone else.)

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

From: [email-masked] (Tracy R. Reed)
Subject: Re: Will a math coprocessor REALLY help?
Date: 9 Sep 1994 23:39:32 GMT

Sven Goldt ([email-masked]) wrote:
: IMHO a math co wouldn't improve much, but more ram !

Definity, more RAM, definitly....

=============================================================================
Mr. Tracy Reed         |Every artist is a cannibal.| Why did dad cry 
San Diego State Univ.  |Every poet is a thief.     |  when I gave him
Aerospace Engineering  |All kill their inspiration |  Willmaker 1.0?
[email-masked] |And sing about their grief.|
[email-masked]      |-U2 IRC-Maelcum /me smiles |  
=============================================================================

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

From: [email-masked] (Pierre Uszynski)
Crossposted-To: biz.config
Subject: Re: Biz.comp.linux*
Date: 10 Sep 1994 05:14:49 GMT

In <[email-masked]> [email-masked] (Dan Busarow) writes:

>Steve Wicke ([email-masked]) wrote, in biz.config:
>>      I would like to create a set of groups called biz.comp.linux* for 
>> hardware, & software. Maybe we could just call it 
>> biz.comp.linux.services. What do you think?
>
>5 comp.os.linux groups [exist].  Why [...] a new hierarchy in biz?

And so far, distribution, configuration and consulting businesses
have been welcome to post there (within the usual limits of decency,
and etiquette...), and get mentioned in the FAQs easily. It's just that
these are groups where these limits are actually respected, as opposed
to many others :-( I guess that it has to do with the principals of
these businesses being net dwellers themselves :-)

Pierre.
[email-masked]

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

From: [email-masked] (Benjamin Alman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Xconfig for 320x200 or similar mode?
Date: 10 Sep 1994 04:45:49 GMT
Reply-To: [email-masked]

Does anyone know how to get a 320x200 or similar resolution in XFree386
2.1.1 ??? I have an ATI GUP video card, and a CTX CPS-1560 monitor...

my video stuff in my Xconfig is:

accel
        chipset "mach32"
        option "hw_cursor"
        clocks 100 126 92 36 51 57 0 44 135 32 110 80 39 45 75 65 50 63 ...
          ...  46 18 25 28 0 22 67 16 55 40 19 23 37 33
        modes "1024x767" "800x600" "640x480"
        biosbase 0xC0000
        virtual 1024 767
        viewport 0 0

modeDB
        "1024x767"      65      1024 1080 1222 1304     767 771 777 798
        "800x600"       36      800 824 896 1024        600 601 603 625
        "640x480"       25.175  640 644 760 800         480 491 493 525
                        25.175  640 672 768 800         480 490 492 525
        
any ideas????????? Please email me if possible.. thanks!

--
=============================================================================
From: Ben Alman, Internet: [email-masked], My PC: [email-masked]
Linux 1.1.49 + XFree386-2.1.1, Slackware 2.0 on an i486 DX/2-66 with 20mb RAM 
It's just the age, It's just a stage, We disengage, We turn the page... -Rush

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

From: [email-masked] (Bill C. Riemers)
Crossposted-To: alt.games.doom
Subject: Re: DOOM, X, Linux, 320x200 video mode ??
Date: 10 Sep 1994 05:30:00 GMT
Reply-To: [email-masked]

>>>>> "Tim" == Tim Smith <[email-masked]> writes:

    Tim> Bill C. Riemers <[email-masked]> 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.

    Tim> Get shorter speaker cables.

Yea, Yea!  Thats the ticket.  What a great suggestion.  Not!  :-) :-)
Last I check signals travel fairly fast through speaker wire.  I
suppose someone could get long enough cables for this to be a problem, but
at that point I would be more worried about my floor caving in from
tons of cable.  Someone else pointed out the problem is that the sound
is playing at way too slow of a speed.  That is probably why the sound
continues even after I quit the game.

It sounds like, from other people's post, sound isn't working properly
for anyone.  If I turn off the speakers and drop the screen resolution
it is playable, but not with anywhere near the quality I can get in
DOS...  From dos it takes the full screen and the sound works 
right.  I guess I won't be ordering any of the other episodes if
this is the best it gets.  However, I'm still hoping there is a 
way to change the audio device defaults to get it to work right.

                              Bill

                               

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

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