Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #599
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:     Thu, 27 Jan 94 17:44:50 EST

Linux-Misc Digest #599, Volume #1                Thu, 27 Jan 94 17:44:50 EST

Contents:
  Re: Linux Who's Who and History Projects (Joe Buck)
  New user (hopefully) need help (Kirk Andrew Munro)
  Not enough memory !!! (Roberto Rossi)
  Re: IDE > 500MB? ( Karsten Ballueder)
  Re: Informal POLL: What do you use Linux for? (H. Peter Anvin)
  Re: [Q] Pentium or 486DX2.... (Amancio Hasty Jr)
  Re: Informal POLL: What do you use Linux for? (Carl Boernecke)
  Re: MSDOS Better than Linux (Theo Scott)
  Re: New GCC 2.5.9 and new libs??? (Joe Buck)
  Re: Emacs-Problems (Tat Lam NGUYEN)
  Sounds for Mosaic in Linux (Gene Choi)
  Re: New GCC 2.5.9 and new libs??? (Gerd Rausch)
  Re: Modem woes (Schultz, Russell)
  bug in accept() ?? (matthew c. mead)
  Re: Linux as X-Terminal? No! (Donald J. Becker)
  Re: Linux as X-Terminal? No! (Mark A. Davis)
  Re: Linux Distributions and the Shadow Pass (Jonathan Buzzard)
  Re: new shadow-3.3.1 patches (John F. Haugh II)
  HELP! problem with LILO ... (Roger Haschke)
  Re: Emacs-Problems (Joost Helberg)
  Re: CAS for Linux (was Re: Mathematica for Linux) (Allan Adler)

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

From: jbuck@synopsys.com (Joe Buck)
Subject: Re: Linux Who's Who and History Projects
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 1994 22:36:29 GMT

shendrix@escape.twuug.com (C. S. Hendrix) writes:
>Also, someone said I should include the people at GNU/FSF who wrote the
>GCC compiler, Emacs, etc.  I disagree.  While I'm sure we all appreciate
>the efforts of those people, they did not develop Linux.

Fair enough, if and only if you give H. J. no credit for providing GCC
for Linux, as he did about 1/1000 of the work involved (compared to the
task of writing a highly portable C compiler that generates good i386/486
code, the task of porting it to Linux was miniscule).  I've already seen
such claims floating around the Linux community (that H.J did the compiler).

Also, it's only fair if you give no credit for anyone who developed any
application on Linux, since you're discriminating against those who
wrote portable code and provided free software for many systems, not
just Linux.

Similarly, if you credit people who did the slight bit of hacking required
to port GNU applications to Linux without crediting the original developers,
you risk making the Linux community seem very, very ungrateful.

It really won't add very much to your history to be truthful and admit
that it couldn't have been done without the FSF.  Linus always gives this
credit when he's interviewed.

It wouldn't be that long a list to add the FSF people who made the key
contributions and wrote the applications that Linus used to develop the
thing in the first place.



-- 
-- Joe Buck     jbuck@synopsys.com
Posting from but not speaking for Synopsys, Inc.
Formerly jbuck@<various-hosts>.eecs.berkeley.edu

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

From: munro@ug.cs.dal.ca (Kirk Andrew Munro)
Subject: New user (hopefully) need help
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 05:53:19 GMT

I was looking for Linux to run on my system with DOS and OS/2
could someone please e-mail me some help as I am very unfamiliar with
this. What I need to know if what I need....where to get it..and how
to install it..other questions are does it have to be my bootable OS?..
I need something with TCP/IP ability as well....any help would be great

Brian Ronan

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

From: roberto@csr.unibo.it (Roberto Rossi)
Subject: Not enough memory !!!
Date: 17 Jan 94 08:44:15 GMT

I've installed Linux 0.99 PL13, Slackware Release 1.1.0, on a
Compaq Presario 486 SX with 100 Mb HD and 4 Mb RAM.
I've rebuilt the kernel to support a 3C503 card and disk quotas. 
No problems, but the system runs some hours and then
stops with the following message:

                                Not enough memory

The swap partition is 16 Mb. What's the problem ?


Roberto Rossi
roberto@csr.unibo.it

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

From: karsten@lt6.cs.rhbnc.ac.uk ( Karsten Ballueder)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,comp.periphs.scsi
Subject: Re: IDE > 500MB?
Date: 26 Jan 1994 10:24:42 GMT
Reply-To: karsten@lt6.cs.rhbnc.ac.uk ( Karsten Ballueder)


Who told you this nonsense?

I have a Conner 540MB IDE drive on my normal (VLB) IDE-controller and can access
all of it (1076 tracks) without any problems.
The problem with this value being bigger than 1024 applies - as far as I know-
only to old and stupid systems like Messy-Dos. I could not use the part >1024
under DR-DOS, but it works perfectly under Linux.

--
+------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|Karsten Ball"uder:     kballued@charon.physik.uni-osnabrueck.de               |
|                       kballued@reliant.physik.uni-osnabrueck.de              |
| Ceterum censeo        +------------------------------------------------------+
| windowsinem esse      | Royal Holloway, c/o Physics Department               |
| delendam!             | Egham Hill, Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX                   |
|                       | Great Britain                                        |
+-----------------------+------------------------------------------------------+


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

From: hpa@hook.eecs.nwu.edu (H. Peter Anvin)
Subject: Re: Informal POLL: What do you use Linux for?
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 01:20:06 GMT

In article <2i3ck5$fmq@athena.cs.uga.edu>,
T. Daniel Crawford <crawdad@smerdis.ccqc.uga.edu> wrote:
>Linux Users:
>
>       This is an informal poll on this newsgroup intended to find out what
>this operating system is used for, in general.  This poll is prompted by the
>numerous discussion of what one can do with some OS's but not with others.
>So, please respond to me, either via e-mail, or to this group (if you think
>people would be interested in your response).  I will try to give a short
>description of the responses after about a week.  
>
>       So, please, tell me what you use your Linux box for.  I really want
>to know!

I maintain four Linux boxes, and has helped set up a few more.  Of
those four, two are used in research -- primarily as X-terminals but
they occationally see number-crunching work (and occationally save the
day when our big UNIX workstation crashes!).  One is used primarily
for net access (it is the one machine listed as "obviously strange or
misconfigured" in the BogoMips FAQ); the fourth one is my home machine
which I use primarily for C programming, testbed, and occational
games.

        /hpa
-- 
This message was sent from a system running Linux, the freeware UNIX
clone.  Get yours from tsx-11.mit.edu or sunsite.unc.edu.

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help,comp.windows.x.i386unix
From: hasty@netcom.com (Amancio Hasty Jr)
Subject: Re: [Q] Pentium or 486DX2....
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 06:37:59 GMT

Anyone out there got any fast xbench numbers for a Pentium system superior
to a 486DX2 66 class machines?

I am looking around for a barebones system.
since I  already all the peripherals that I need for the time being. 
As for memory I will probably just buy 16MB (I know the more the better)

The reason why I am asking because I have seen low xbench results
on some pentium systems.

        Thanks,
        Amancio

-- 
FREE unix, gcc, tcp/ip, X, open-look, interviews, tcl/tk, MIME, midi, sound
at  freebsd.cdrom.com:/pub/FreeBSD
Amancio Hasty,  Consultant |
Home: (415) 495-3046       |  
e-mail hasty@netcom.com    |  ftp-site depository of all my work:    
ahasty@cisco.com           |  sunvis.rtpnc.epa.gov:/pub/386bsd/X

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

From: carlb@inex.com (Carl Boernecke)
Subject: Re: Informal POLL: What do you use Linux for?
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 09:38:21 GMT

crawdad@smerdis.ccqc.uga.edu (T. Daniel Crawford) writes:
>       This is an informal poll on this newsgroup intended to find out what
>this operating system is used for, in general.  This poll is prompted by the
>numerous discussion of what one can do with some OS's but not with others.
>So, please respond to me, either via e-mail, or to this group (if you think
>people would be interested in your response).  I will try to give a short
>description of the responses after about a week.  

Well, here at InEx Net (located in Seattle, Washington), we use
Linux to provide our UUCP, USENET, SLIP, and PPP services to
local folks either via dialup use, or interractive accounts.  Very
small time.

We also provide the same functions, as well as network management
and utilities for a another business down the hall from us in this
building.  We have a box set-up (along with a few terminals) that
provides a custom program for them (which was incredibly easy to
port), as well as word processing, spreadsheets, database, etc.
None of the software cost a single penny, and the hardware was
nearly as inexpensive.  Their program, which origionally ran
under MS-DOS, only took an hour or two to get running without
any problems, and is noticably faster than the origional, even
though it runs on the same machine, and is virtually the same
code.

>       So, please, tell me what you use your Linux box for.  I really want
>to know!

I know of a hospital in the area that is planning on switching
to a bunch of Linux boxes, but I'm not sure what they are going
to do with them.

-- 
-- Carl Boernecke (carlb@inex.com [MIME-ready])
   "Remember to drive carefully.  90% of all people are caused by
   accidents."

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

From: rkwtgs@pukrs3.puk.ac.za (Theo Scott)
Subject: Re: MSDOS Better than Linux
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 10:54:26 GMT

In article <LOADER.94Jan24140143@murrimbidgee.maths.ox.ac.uk> loader@maths.ox.ac.uk (Ralph Loader) writes:
>From: loader@maths.ox.ac.uk (Ralph Loader)
>Subject: Re: MSDOS Better than Linux
>Date: 24 Jan 1994 14:01:43 GMT

>In article <1994Jan24.112419.8317@black.ox.ac.uk> univ0020@black.ox.ac.uk
>(Julian D Glover) writes:

>   In terms of real world work you lusers should realise that MS-DOS and
>   MS-Windows is far better than some half assed Unix toy, get a life and
>   pay for your software like everyone else you spongers.

>Before anyone flames this guy too badly, he was silly enough to leave his
>terminal logged on when he wasn't present ...


Bill Gates is afraid to give the source code of Msdos and Ms-windows because
then everyone would see how many bugs there are !!

"If you can't get it to work, then let it look good" - Bill Gates

Theo



 
     /-----------------------------------------------------------------\
     |    Theo Scott                      Dept. Computer Science       |
     |    Tel: +27 +148 +99-2531          Potchefstroom University     |
     +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
     |  User of OS/2, Linux and passionately waiting for POWER PC to   |
     |  crush the world (including the Pentium).                       |
     +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
     |  All the above are my and only my opinion.                      |
     \-----------------------------------------------------------------/

                      



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

From: jbuck@synopsys.com (Joe Buck)
Subject: Re: New GCC 2.5.9 and new libs???
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 1994 23:39:35 GMT

vohwi-d@acsu.buffalo.edu (David A. Vohwinkel) writes:
>I was told that they were coming out in a couple weeks around christmas...
>anyone know what the status of them is??  I like to be on the bleeding
>edge...  :-)

It would be very embarrassing indeed for the FSF if they had to go to
gcc-2.5.9.  They just released 2.5.8 on Sunday, which has several mainly
platform-specific bug fixes (particularly for the IBM RS/6000, which was
completely broken in 2.5.7) and a couple of other fixes for obscure cases.
I don't see any good reasons for Linuxers with 2.5.7 to bother upgrading.
Maybe it was 2.5.8 you heard about.  Anyway, this is the first time the
third digit has exceeded 5, and the whole thing has been an embarrassment.

Unless something goes very wrong, there will probably be no more releases
until 2.6.0 and that probably won't be out for a while.


-- 
-- Joe Buck     jbuck@synopsys.com
Posting from but not speaking for Synopsys, Inc.
Formerly jbuck@<various-hosts>.eecs.berkeley.edu

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

From: tln@uni-paderborn.de (Tat Lam NGUYEN)
Subject: Re: Emacs-Problems
Date: 26 Jan 1994 11:12:11 GMT

 Just install the emacs package with X support(there are TWO emacs packages!).
 The package on disk e1 is with X support (emacsbin.tgz), the another one on
 disk e5 is w/o X support.

 Have fun,
 TLN

Ralf Schroers (Ralf.Schroers@gmd.de) wrote in article <1994Jan26.091042.28222@gmd.de> (Wed, 26 Jan 1994 09:10:42 GMT):

> After installing Slackware 1.1.1 emacs doesn't open a new window under
> xfree 2.0 and all windows managers. The term-variable is set to
> xterm. This problem was not under Slackeware 1.1.0. What could be the
> reson for this?

> Thanks for any help.

> Ralf.Schroers@gmd.de

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

From: genie@scam.Berkeley.EDU (Gene Choi)
Subject: Sounds for Mosaic in Linux
Date: 26 Jan 1994 11:12:52 GMT


Hello,

I have a quick question that someone who's familiar with the sound
parts of Linux can answer.  I am running Mosaic 2.0 (i.e. xmosaic)
and wish to play the sound hyperlinks.  I have the Sound driver
2.0 installed into my linux 0.99pl14o kernel.  Everything works
fine.  I have str, tracker, wavplay, vplay compiled to play my
sound stuff.  However, NCSA Mosaic looks for a program called
"showaudio" that I guess is what's available on Sparcstations
(I think most of the sounds are in Sun au format?).  If this is the
case, I have yet to find one good on-the-fly au player (sure there's
sox but you need to convert files from au format to xx format manually).

Is there such a program called "showaudio" or a clone of it which
can read raw and au format sounds?

-Gene
genie@xcf.berkeley.edu

--  No annoyingly long sigs here, to make the world a better place --

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

From: eedger@teamos41.ericsson.se (Gerd Rausch)
Subject: Re: New GCC 2.5.9 and new libs???
Date: 26 Jan 1994 00:01:20 GMT

>>>>> "Joe" == Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.com> writes:
In article <1994Jan25.233935.24125@Synopsys.Com> jbuck@synopsys.com (Joe Buck) writes:

    Joe> Unless something goes very wrong, there will probably be no
    Joe> more releases until 2.6.0 and that probably won't be out for
    Joe> a while.


I've upgraded recently to gcc-2.5.7 and found a serious one, try this:

---snip snip-----snip snip--------snip snip--------
#include <stream.h>
class Foo {
public:
  Foo(){ cout << "Foo::Foo()" << endl; }
  ~Foo(){ cout << "Foo::~Foo()" << endl; }
};
int main()
{
  for(int i=1;i<=2;i++){
    if(i==1)
      continue;
    Foo bar;
  }
}
---snip snip-----snip snip--------snip snip--------

produces the following output:
Foo::~Foo()
Foo::Foo()
Foo::~Foo()

As you can see, the destructor of Foo is called before the constructor
with i=2. The reason is probably the continue, that skips
the constructor-, but unfortunately not the destructor-call.

This happens with linux-0.99pl4 running gcc-2.5.7
and with SunOS-4.1.3 running gcc-2.5.6

I got some other problems as well, which I couldn't track down
to a small test program. So there seem to be at least some problems.

BTW: What happened to gcc ? I know this already worked with gcc-2.4.*
--
Don't let the ".se" fool you

____/|  Gerd Rausch
\ o.O|
 =(_)=  voice: +49-2407-575-353
   U    email: eedger@aachen.ericsson.se

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

From: Schultz_Russell@semail.jsc.nasa.gov (Schultz, Russell)
Subject: Re: Modem woes
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 1994 21:31:20 GMT

In article <dmezera.759074213@afit.af.mil>
dmezera@afit.af.mil (David N Mezera) writes:

> Ever since I installed linux pl-12 a while back I've been unable to
> access my modem (it works fine under DOS, and worked fine under linux
> pl-9, so I doubt the problem is with the modem hardware). When I dial
> out under kermit, the machine pauses for about 5-10 seconds before I
> get the following message:
> 
>                         Call failed ("n").
> 
> When the problem first appeared, I rm'd cua3 (since my modem is set up
> for COM4), and then used MAKEDEV to recreate cua3. For a short time
> after this, the modem worked and I thought I had the problem solved.
> The problem has since reappeared and repeating this process has not
> worked. 
> 
> Any ideas?
> 
I had trouble too...but it was probably different.  If you have an
external modem--check and make sure that the hardware handshaking pins
are connected.
(minicom gave me fits about it, and i had to ask here too)

Russ.

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

From: mmead@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (matthew c. mead)
Subject: bug in accept() ??
Date: 26 Jan 1994 01:06:42 -0500


        I have a recurring problem under linux.  I've run the OS since about
.97pl6, and have liked it more and more all the time; but now the networking is
really beginning to get in my way.  I run a moo on my machine, and every so
often the moo will hang.  I've traced the hang to accept() with gdb, which is
the routine that links a net socket (port, whatever) to a program via a file
descriptor.  Currently I use SLIP to connect to the net, and I am running
lib[cm]4.5.8, with gcc 2.5.7.  I had the problem under pl14, so I put in pl14u
tonight, and still have the problem.  I didn't notice the problem back under
pl12, but then again the MOO didn't have near as much net traffic back then
as it does now.  Anyone know anything that could help?  I'm so frustrated with
killing the process, restarting it, and losing data that I'm seriously
considering switching to one of the free BSD ports.  But I'd like to get this
resolved and stay with linux if possible.  Adthanksvance.





-- 
-- Matthew C. Mead --       | "I can't hardly find someone out of the
mmead@slapshot.async.vt.edu | entire human race who is wise 24 hours a day."
mmead@csugrad.cs.vt.edu     |----------------------| - some Renaissance dude
http://slapshot.async.vt.edu/~mmead/home.html      |-------------------------

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

Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.i386unix
From: becker@super.org (Donald J. Becker)
Subject: Re: Linux as X-Terminal? No!
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 1994 22:21:05 GMT

In article <1994Jan22.045853.14352@taylor.wyvern.com>,
Mark A. Davis <mark@taylor.wyvern.com> wrote:
>>Does the "lower long-term costs" include the load on the network and server?
>
>Yep.  The reduced maintenance overheads really do pay off, even factoring
>those in.  Network loads are usually less than most workstation setups.
>Xterminals usually produce a number of small packets.  Computers, on the
>other hand, are typically transfering much larger files (though more
>infrequently) which causes more collisions.  This does not always hold,

False: transferring large packets results in far fewer collisions.

The ethernet collision window is 512 bits at the start of the packet.  (Small
packets must be padded to be at least this long, so that the controller
doesn't miss detecting a collision that has occurred.)  Large packets have
exactly the same risk of collision during the first 512 bits, but have
almost no collision risk for the rest of the packet.  Thus using large
packets will almost certainly result in fewer collisions per unit time, as
well as more effectively use the network bandwidth.

>but many sites have a fairly large amount of NFS mounting on workstations,
>causing lots of overhead.  But everyone should keep in mind that Xterminals
>*DO* put load on the hosts; one must examine this carefully.

The usual result is a set of large, expensive hosts connected to moderately
priced X terminals.  The total cost is typically greater than workstation
networks, especially when compared to low-cost Linux workstations.

The administrative burden is less with X terminals, but it would be even lower
with character terminals hooked to a slow mainframe.  Do your site's users
demand modern performance levels, or do the system administrators demand the
simplest possible system to tend?  It a classic money-time-performance
tradeoff.

Every time I look at the market, I'm amazed at the high price of X
terminals.  High end models approach the price of low-end traditional
workstations, and are far more than a typical Linux/X workstation.  The
mid-range models are about the same as a typical Linux machine with the same
display and memory.  I would have thought that by avoiding the disk and not
having to adhere to PC standards (everything on the slow ISA bus, dozens of
VGA modes, multisync, etc.) X terminals could be made far cheaper and
faster, but the mass production of PC components seems to have won.

-- 

Donald Becker                                          becker@super.org
IDA Supercomputing Research Center
17100 Science Drive, Bowie MD 20715                        301-805-7482

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

Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.i386unix
From: mark@taylor.wyvern.com (Mark A. Davis)
Subject: Re: Linux as X-Terminal? No!
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 14:03:07 GMT

kubla@goofy.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (Dominik Kubla) writes:

>Using Linux as X-Terminal might be useful, even if a real X-Terminal might
>be faster. Consider at site like a University, where lots of PC's are
>accessible for the user but only a small number of X-Terminals (like here
>at U-Mainz). What are you going to tell the departments? "Dump your new
>Nevell/Windows cluster and buy X-Terminals"? That won't make Unix/X11 more
>popular! If you say instead: "Hell, we got this little exe file which will
>turn your PC's into unix X-terminals if need is, please install it on your
>server ..." That will bring a whole new bunch of users to Unix/X11 ...

Extremely correct.  One should always make the best use of whatever
equipment is available.

>That's the way to think! Using a diskless linux kernel to start a X-server
>on a PC in a LAN is far cheaper than buying additional color x-terminals,

However, that can be incorrect.  The average cost of a decently configured
clone to run Linux/X/ether/etc will still be more than most low end color
Xterminals.  But your diskless/floppyless suggestion does make it really
hard to match the prices.....
Still, there will still be somewhat higher administrative costs with your
suggestion (research, install).  Although the diskless/boot Linux for Xserver
idea is actually the first time I have heard that suggestion!!!  It makes a
lot of sense and is the first realistic suggestion given to turn a clone
into an Xterminal without the need for the extreme overhead of local
media (IE: cost, installation, maintenance, backup, viruses, security,
non approved local software, etc).

But how would one do that?  Can you get a Linux boot ROM for an ethernet
controller?  Most people wanting to turn a clone into an Xterminal had
been looking at trashing local media and putting tiny-Linux on ROM.  The
remote boot idea is tremendously more logical, as it would require much less
ROM; and it would follow the way most Xterminals get their Xserver files
anyway....

-- 
  /--------------------------------------------------------------------------\
  | Mark A. Davis    | Lake Taylor Hospital | Norfolk, VA (804)-461-5001x431 |
  | Sys.Administrator|  Computer Services   | mark@taylor.wyvern.com   .uucp |
  \--------------------------------------------------------------------------/

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

From: phyjab1@phy.hw.ac.uk (Jonathan Buzzard)
Subject: Re: Linux Distributions and the Shadow Pass
Reply-To: phyjab1@phy.hw.ac.uk
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 13:06:23 GMT


>The fact remains -- several people took code which did not belong to
>them and sold it against the wishes of the owner.  I don't care what
>you call "Linux".  I call what was done "theft".

Strange deffinition of theft. Theft is the *illegal* taking of something.
If someone puts restictions on something, with a specific intention
in mind, and then someone finds a way do what those restrictions
are intended to prevent without breaking the very same restrictions,
then they are not guilty of theft, they have found a loop hole; thats
all.


JAB.

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

From: jfh@rpp386 (John F. Haugh II)
Subject: Re: new shadow-3.3.1 patches
Reply-To: jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F. Haugh II)
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 15:01:55 GMT

In article <1994Jan25.232044.16563@kf8nh.wariat.org> bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
>Your tone is starting to sound to me like "you'll use my software on my terms
>and like it!  If you don't you don't deserve to use mine or anyone else's!"  I
>had no argument with your putting whatever terms you chose on the shadow code,
>but *this* is rapidly getting old.  Are you sooooo *very* special that we must
>all kowtow to you and use *your* code no matter what?
>
>Do whatever you want with the licensing, but lose the attitude already.

As soon as I can get past the lies that Rick and others have been
spreading, then we can address issues like licensing.  This entire
fiasco started because I told Rick I was upset about companies
selling Shadow without my knowledge or consent.  I told Rick I was
going to come up with some decision and made the incredibly stupid
mistake of telling him what my initial thoughts were.

As for a GPL'd version of Shadow, have at it.  Shadow has been
around for 6 years and only recently has anyone seen a need for a
GPL'd version of the code.  I suspect that once everyone gets over
the "Shadow is evil commercial software" hysteria, the calls for a
GPL'd version of shadow will die down.  None of the BSD code in
Linux is GPL'd and I don't see people calling for the complete
re-write of all the code from BSD that is included.
-- 
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
The P.C. Movement killed the 1st Amendment, the Brady Bill the 2nd, the WOsD
got the 4th and 5th, political activism the 9th and 10th.  Not much left, eh?

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

From: rh@cs.uni-frankfurt.de (Roger Haschke)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: HELP! problem with LILO ...
Date: 25 Jan 1994 07:39:44 GMT
Reply-To: rh@cs.uni-frankfurt.de

hi folks,

i have installed SLS on my 386. in the machine there's a 200MB ide drive
plus a 88MB Syquest (via Syquest hostbus adapter).

Linux is on /dev/hda2, while /dev/hda1 is my swap partition for Linux.
At the moment, there's DOS 5.0 on the Syquest.

Now i want to use LILO to select what OS to boot.

my /etc/lilo/config is:

        boot=/dev/hda
        compact
        install=/etc/lilo/boot.b
        
        image=/zImage
                label=linux
                vga=ask
                root=/dev/hda2
                
        other=/dev/sda1
                table=/dev/sda
                label=msdos
                
furthermore i have a /etc/lilo/disktab for my Syquest drive as follows:

        0x800   0x80    57      3       1014    0       # /dev/sda
        0x801   0x80    57      3       1014    57      # /dev/sda1
        
now the following happens:
when booting, i select linux and everything works fine. linux boots
and i have mounted the Syquest as /dos.
but when i boot and select msdos, nothing further happens.
the machine seems to hang. it doesn't boot either OS.

are there any mistakes in the config or disktab file?
or is it quite impossible to boot off the Syquest while the 
ide drive is known to the pc's bios?

hope anybody can help ...

thanks, Roger

================================================================================
Roger Haschke                                               Fauerbach
Universitaet Frankfurt                                      Hauptstrasse 42
rh@thi.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de                          35510 Butzbach
haschke@rbi.informatik.uni-frankfurt.de                     Tel. +49(0)6033 4201
================================================================================
                ... ich bin gut zu Voegeln in Wald und Flur ...
================================================================================





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

From: jhelberg@nlsun8.oracle.nl (Joost Helberg)
Subject: Re: Emacs-Problems
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 1994 14:48:24 GMT

In article <2i5j6b$oau@news.uni-paderborn.de> tln@uni-paderborn.de (Tat Lam NGUYEN) writes:
    Just install the emacs package with X support(there are TWO emacs packages!).
    The package on disk e1 is with X support (emacsbin.tgz), the another one on
    disk e5 is w/o X support.

Why are there 2 different packages? Emacs will support ASCII as 
well as X within the same binary.

This might confuse people.

--
   Joost Helberg                              Rijnzathe 6
   jhelberg@oracle.nl                         NL-3454 PV De Meern
   jhelberg@nl.oracle.com                     The Netherlands

   Oracle Europe BV                           Product Line Development  
   Phone: +31 3406 94211                      Fax:   +31 3406 65609

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

From: ara@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Allan Adler)
Subject: Re: CAS for Linux (was Re: Mathematica for Linux)
Date: 26 Jan 94 13:26:03


Where does one get maxima  for free in a form that will run under
Linux?

Alaln Adler
ara@altdorf.ai.mit.edu

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


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