Subject: Linux-Development Digest #790
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:     Fri, 3 Jun 94 23:13:05 EDT

Linux-Development Digest #790, Volume #1          Fri, 3 Jun 94 23:13:05 EDT

Contents:
  Re: Need: MSDOS & ISO9660 filesystem source (Scott A. Laird)
  Re: 1.1.16 kernel doesn't want to boot! (Alex Ramos)
  Re: Linux game development (Was Re: Why [DOS, W (Stuart Herbert)
  Re: Let's rename v1.0.9! [Was: Frustrated with new kernels] (Brandon S. Allbery)
  Re: Frustrated with new kernels (Jay Allen)
  iscntrl(128) thru iscntrl(255) (David Fox)
  Re: Linux game development (Was Re: Why [DOS, W (Greg Alt)
  Re: Frustrated with new kernels (Keith Pritchard)
  Re: Linux game development (Was Re: Why [DOS, W (Dan Newcombe)
  Re: Frustrated with new k (Steve Tinney)
  Scanner Support. (Witch's Hair)
  Re: Frustrated with new kernels (Jim Robinson)
  Re: OI and UIB on linux with gcc-2.5.8 (James Klicman)

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

From: lair@kimbark.uchicago.edu (Scott A. Laird)
Subject: Re: Need: MSDOS & ISO9660 filesystem source
Reply-To: lair@midway.uchicago.edu
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 1994 04:13:46 GMT

In article <113287@cup.portal.com>,
Cliff C Heyer <cliffhanger@cup.portal.com> wrote:
>I have linux on many(!) floppy disks and have not
>loaded it yet. I think (?) you can mount MSDOS 
>partitions with it? Can this also be done with
>ISO9660? Is the source code within my disks of
>linux?
>
>Cliff

Yes, Linux can read and write to DOS partitions with no problems.  It
can also read (but not write) to OS/2 HPFS filesystems.  It can also
read CD-ROMs with ISO 9660 filesystems, assuming that you have a
supported CD-ROM drive.  Yes, the source should be somewhere on those
disks, but if it's not for some reason (like it was never copied onto
the disks) you can FTP the Linux kernel source from sunsite.unc.edu.  


Scott.









-- 
Scott A. Laird            |  "But this goes to 18,446,744,073,709,551,615"
lair@midway.uchicago.edu  |                - Nigel on his 64-bit computer


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

From: ramos@engr.latech.edu (Alex Ramos)
Subject: Re: 1.1.16 kernel doesn't want to boot!
Date: 2 Jun 1994 17:49:14 GMT

Eugene Tyurin (gene@insti.physics.sunysb.edu), quoted out of context, wrote:
>               crc error
>               System halted

It sounds like a hardware error to me.  I _think_ this is the error
message I got on a machine that had a lose (wobbly) SIMM. (it booted
DOS fine though).

--
Alex Ramos (ramos@engr.latech.edu) * http://info.latech.edu/~ramos/
Louisiana Tech University, BSEE/Sr * These opinions are probably mine

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

From: ac3slh@sunc.sheffield.ac.uk (Stuart Herbert)
Subject: Re: Linux game development (Was Re: Why [DOS, W
Date: 3 Jun 1994 16:34:47 GMT

John J. Sullivan (sullivan@thresher.Eng.Sun.COM) wrote:
: [Long arguments about Dos, Windows, OS/2, and why each is better for
:  developing videogames deleted. ]

: Considerer that Linux could actually make a pretty good game development
: platform:

: 1. It's free.

You get DOS/Windows with virtually every PC that is shipped, these days ...

: 2. All programs run in 32-bit mode in a flat (virtual) address space.

They can do this under DOS and Windows as well ...

: 3. Good, complete, standard C, C++ compilers and development aids.

Where?  I wasn't aware anyone had ported Watcom to Linux yet.

: 4. Excellent software development and testing environment.

I wouldn't say excellent, but having an operating system that's more stable
than DOS/Windows is a definite plus.

: 4. Svgalib provides an almost 'bare-metal' graphics interface.

No thanks.  I for one loathe running stuff as root.  I'd rather see developers
concentrate on using the shared memory extensions for X (which means they could
port their efforts to other platforms as well).

: 5. Reasonable basic keyboard, joystick, mouse, soundcard, etc. support.

Windows also has this (well, the sound still sucks, but it can only get
better :)

: 6. Other hardware features can be accessed though special programming.

Only if you either write a driver for the kernel, or run as 'root'.  In
this respect, Linux is at a heavy disadvantage to DOS/Windows.

: 7. Assembly language tools (although the quality may not be good) exist.

To be honest, very few games these days bother to use machine code.  That's
why all these strategy games seem to run only on a 486 :)

: 8. Networking, multitasking built in.

Mixed blessing this one - IPX is a lighter protocol which makes it more
suitable for playing games over a LAN, whereas TCP/IP is better for stuff
like the Internet ...

: The main objection that I see to using Linux is that games developed 
: under it cannot be run directly from DOS, and generally require Linux
: to already be installed on a user's machine.  Here's what I suggest:

: 1. Develop a version of LILO that runs as a DOS executable and can boot
:    a Linux kernal image from a DOS file.

Been done ages ago.

: 2. Develop a minimal Linux kernel that, when booted, mounts the DOS disk
:    it's root directory, and runs the game executable.

Why a minimal kernel?  Surely the parts of the kernel that don't get used
never get paged into memory?

: This eliminates the need for the user to install Linux on their machine
: or to reboot just to run the game.  On the other hand, it requires that
: a Linux kernel be distributed with the game (about 1M) and the machine
: will probably need to be rebooted after playing.

: (The reason that I posted this to c.o.l.d is that I think that having the
: capability to boot a Linux application from within DOS would provide a very
: interesting way to encourage Linux as a development platform for large,
: complex PC software for mass-distribution to DOS users.)  

Eh?  Why not just get them to install Linux and have done with it?

Stuart
--
Stuart Herbert -- S.Herbert@shef.ac.uk

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

From: bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery)
Subject: Re: Let's rename v1.0.9! [Was: Frustrated with new kernels]
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 1994 15:58:51 GMT

In article <1133@blox.se>, bj0rn@blox.se (Bjorn Ekwall) says:
+---------------
| Let us rename 1.0.9 to 1.2.0!
+------------->8

Only if we ever go back to fixing bugs in it.  The "stability" release is at
the moment something of a joke.

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery         kf8nh@kf8nh.ampr.org          bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
The FUDs at Microsoft are shouting "Kill The Wabi!"

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

From: jay@caeser.geog.pdx.edu (Jay Allen)
Subject: Re: Frustrated with new kernels
Date: 2 Jun 1994 17:46:59 GMT

Thomas Heiling (tom@wpzd07.pzlc.uni-wuerzburg.de) wrote:
: Rob Janssen (rob@pe1chl.ampr.org) wrote:
: : In <2sje4b$ntu@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ewalton@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Elaine Walton) writes:

: : >I have tried to compile the new kernels from off of tsx-11--no luck.
: : >I am really confused how others are able to compile, yet I am not.
: : >Maybe it's because I'm trying to go from 1.0.0 directly to 1.1.13-6?
: : >Either way, I have pretty much given up..

: : Many people also have pretty much given up replying to vague complaints
: : like that.
:   ^^^^
:   It is true, that's very vague, *but* have you tried to use on off the
:   newer ( Version >= 1.1.13 ) kernels ?
:   If you are on the Internet, you find very fast, that your old
:   net-0.32b Binaries doesn't work anymore. And there is no README,
:   which explains the Changes. ( There is a inet/README, but there is
:   no File, which says you must change your complete Net-Binaries ).

I thought that 1.0 was the only "production" kernel out, and that 1.1* was
considered Experimenters/developers only?  Is there some functionality that
you need from 1.0+ kernels?


--
========================================================================
* Jay D. Allen       Portland State University, Portland Oregon, U.S.A.*   
*                    The METNET project, Geography Department, and     *
*                    The Center For Science Education.. et al          *
* jay@caeser.geog.pdx.edu        (503)725-3953                         *
========================================================================

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

From: fox@graphics.cs.nyu.edu (David Fox)
Subject: iscntrl(128) thru iscntrl(255)
Date: 03 Jun 1994 02:17:33 GMT

I notice that iscntrl returns true for characters 128 through
255, while under, say, SunOS or IRIX the same function returns
false.  Who is correct?  Are these really control characters?
--
David Fox                                               xoF divaD
NYU Media Research Lab                     baL hcraeseR aideM UYN

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

From: galt@asylum.cs.utah.edu (Greg Alt)
Subject: Re: Linux game development (Was Re: Why [DOS, W
Date: 3 Jun 1994 01:28:02 GMT

In article <2skhit$4o@renux.frmug.fr.net> cougnenc@hsc.fr.net (Rene COUGNENC) writes:
>Just a suggestion, based on MS/DOS users psychology :-)
>If you put together a package based on a small Linux kernel to run games
>(or other applications) from an MS/DOS prompt, call it "Game Extender"
>or some kind of pompous name :-)
>
>I know many DOS users around me that laugh, go away or delete the archive
>when they see the word "Unix"... :-)
>
>Anyway, it is a good idea. Linux can  be installed as a full-featured
>Un*x system, but the kernel can be used in many other ways...

I would love to see someone put a package together to do this...  If someone
ever does this, please post so we can try it out...

That said, I would like to mention one thing that is probably obvious, but
I'll mention it just in case.  If anyone does distribute a Linux kernel and
some support software, remember that they are GPLed...  Definitely read the
GPL a couple of times before distributing binaries.  You should probably 
also contact the authors of the software (e.g. Linus for the kernel) asking
for suggestions for distributing without violating the GPL.  

What would be the most extreme bare-bones system possible?  The kernel is just
300k, and you really wouldn't need much because you could have it boot straight
into the game, so you wouldn't need a shell or even login.  I imagine you'd also
want to staticly link it so that you wouldn't need any shared libraries. 
I would think you could do it with significantly less than a meg.  Maybe as 
little as 400k overhead. 

Greg

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

From: keith@datawell.demon.co.uk (Keith Pritchard)
Subject: Re: Frustrated with new kernels
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 1994 18:29:56 +0000

Thomas Heiling (tom@wpzd07.pzlc.uni-wuerzburg.de) wrote:
:   So the whining from users, who want Linux as a working and stable
:   system is understandable for me.

:   Bye Thomas

I dont really see your problem?

If you have a system that works fine, and you dont like applying patches and
trying new patches out, stick with the one youve got?

but Linux is constantly evolving, developing and growing. For me and others 
that is a big part of its attraction! I sometimes download a patch which DOES
as you say have far-reaching consequences for other binaries or parts of my
system. Then I learn about these parts pretty damn quickly! ;-) And I enjoy it!

If I didnt want to undergo this experience, then I would stay a few kernels 
behind, or possibly stay at the last Major (ie 1.0, 1.1 ) version... I suggest 
that this may be what you should do!

Cheers
Keith

--
*******************************************************************************
 Name:-            |   Email:-                      |  Quote of the week:-
 Keith Pritchard   |   keith@datawell.demon.co.uk   |  Its Hard to work in a
 Aughton           |   keith@sc.lancsp.ac.uk        |  team when youre
 Lancashire,UK     |   100101.1450@compuserve.com   |  omnipotent ! 'Q' ST:TNG
*******************************************************************************

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

From: newcombe@aa.csc.peachnet.edu (Dan Newcombe)
Subject: Re: Linux game development (Was Re: Why [DOS, W
Date: Fri, 3 Jun 1994 13:06:44 UNDEFINED

In article <2snm37$4lt@hippo.shef.ac.uk> ac3slh@sunc.sheffield.ac.uk (Stuart Herbert) writes:
>John J. Sullivan (sullivan@thresher.Eng.Sun.COM) wrote:
>: [Long arguments about Dos, Windows, OS/2, and why each is better for
>:  developing videogames deleted. ]
>: Considerer that Linux could actually make a pretty good game development
>: platform:
>: 1. It's free.
>You get DOS/Windows with virtually every PC that is shipped, these days ...

Yes...but that's an old klunky patch to market the PC   :)  Oh yeah...only 16 
bits.

>: 2. All programs run in 32-bit mode in a flat (virtual) address space.
>They can do this under DOS and Windows as well ...

as well, but not well.  Plus...I don't think I've ever heard a DOS game run 
under Windows with sound over my sound card.  

>: 3. Good, complete, standard C, C++ compilers and development aids.
>Where?  I wasn't aware anyone had ported Watcom to Linux yet.

And here we have the "my xxx is the one to use and all else is crap.".
Gnu CC does just fine.  I won't say that there is a complete C++, as that's 
still an evolving standard.

>: 4. Excellent software development and testing environment.
>I wouldn't say excellent, but having an operating system that's more stable
>than DOS/Windows is a definite plus.

True... But Windows is SO reliable...I can rely on it to crash at least once a 
day.  So far I've crashed it three times today.  Once just moving a window!!!

>: 4. Svgalib provides an almost 'bare-metal' graphics interface.
>No thanks.  I for one loathe running stuff as root.  I'd rather see developers

True...can be scary...but the original post was not talking about developing 
games to run on a Linux system that supports a campus network, but about 
having a Linux boot disk, that would allow the game to run under Linux instead 
of DOS.  The sequence of events could be:
        1) Install files for game within the DOS filesystem, so you don't have to
            repartition.
        2) boot off the Linux disk, which will know where the files are and play the
            game.  No X, no root, just lock and load :)

>: 5. Reasonable basic keyboard, joystick, mouse, soundcard, etc. support.
>Windows also has this (well, the sound still sucks, but it can only get
>better :)

It can't get worse.

>: 6. Other hardware features can be accessed though special programming.
>Only if you either write a driver for the kernel, or run as 'root'.  In
>this respect, Linux is at a heavy disadvantage to DOS/Windows.

I'll agree there.  While my answer to #4 will show why the root won't matter, 
the hardware will be a pain.  If it runs off CD, what kind of CD, what IRQ's, 
etc?  There would have to be loadable modules implemeted to do this, so the 
user can select the right modules for his equipment and use those, otherwise 
the kernel will be HUGE!


>: 7. Assembly language tools (although the quality may not be good) exist.
>To be honest, very few games these days bother to use machine code.  That's
>why all these strategy games seem to run only on a 486 :)

True.  The software companies keep up pretty well with the hardware, but noone 
bothers to try and keep up with what the users can afford.

>Why a minimal kernel?  Surely the parts of the kernel that don't get used
>never get paged into memory?

Minimal so it'll fit on the disk :)  Though with a compressed kernel that 
shouldn't be a problem.

>: This eliminates the need for the user to install Linux on their machine
>: or to reboot just to run the game.  On the other hand, it requires that
>: a Linux kernel be distributed with the game (about 1M) and the machine
>: will probably need to be rebooted after playing.

The only size limitation would be the kernel.  In it's compressed form it 
would need to fit on one high density 3.5" (possibly a 5.25").  The game can 
be unlimited, as the libraries, files, etc... can be placed on the DOS 
filesystem, which the kernel can either mount or run over a UMSDOS system.

>Eh?  Why not just get them to install Linux and have done with it?

"But...but...I can't run DOOM or Windows from Linux.  All hail microsoft."

--
Dan Newcombe                    newcombe@aa.csc.peachnet.edu
Clayton State College           Morrow, Georgia
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
"And the man in the mirror has sad eyes."       -Marillion

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

From: sjt@enlil.museum.upenn.edu (Steve Tinney)
Subject: Re: Frustrated with new k
Date: 2 Jun 1994 18:53:37 GMT

Rick Emerson (rick.emerson@dscmail.com) wrote:
: ... Aside from the 1.0 announcement, I can't
: recall another notice saying, in effect, "OK, gang, this kernel works
: pretty well and won't surprise you."  

: So it *is* frustrating to think there's a later version of the kernel
: that might be a little quicker or cleaner but not which one it is.

: Rick

If Linus and gang wish to run the development as an open-ended
series of alpha releases they are free to do so. The code-freeze
at 1.0 (with its 9 patches) was a great thing to do. When it is time,
the development-gods will decree another such freeze. Until then
you must make your own choice as to whether to stick to 1.0 or
take your chances with the rapidly changing cutting edge stuff.

The developers have no obligation to meet anyone else's demands,
although they often do so because they are such sterling folk. These
are the conditions under which Linux has thrived: don't spoil them.

 Steve

====================================================================
Steve Tinney                                        Babylonian Section
                   University Museum of the University of Pennsylvania
sjt@enlil.museum.upenn.edu                     Phila, PA. 215-898-4047

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

From: amyrick@clark.net (Witch's Hair)
Subject: Scanner Support.
Date: 3 Jun 1994 06:00:30 GMT

I need help in getting my Musteck Full Page Scanner to work using Linux 
and X windows.   Does anyone know any good Photo tools for Linux that 
support the Mustek MFS-6000cx?

Thanks.   Please e-mail with the results.

--
 ________________________________________________________________________
| Todd Allen Myrick               | Best Friends Computer Company        |
| amyrick@clark.net               | 9204 Santa Rita Rd.                  |
| aka. Witch's Hair on WWIV2@4074 | Voice/FAX (410) 256-0823             |
| "Honor to the Queen of Spades"  | Data: Home By The Sea (410)-256-3792 |
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

From: jimr@rocky.cs.wisc.edu (Jim Robinson)
Subject: Re: Frustrated with new kernels
Date: 3 Jun 1994 05:48:04 GMT

In article <2slpi5$51@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> ewalton@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Elaine Walton) writes:
>know the external dependencies if any--a very good programming practice.
>Also, one typically expects that when he/she downloads a package that is
>supposed to work on an existing system (with no external dependencies
>mentioned) will work.  While I have worked on millions of lines of code

I don't even know what the problem is yet (my news archive does not
have it, so sue me :), but I would like to point out that I have used
Linux from .99p6, and so far the *only* problem I recall being hit
with was trying to patch 1.1.11 with pl12, where it barfed because of
a few mistyped problems.  I would consider all those other patchs a
pretty good success story considering how much code comes from all
over the world to one man, who has to make sur e it works.  Of course
I have a generic IDE/No periph system, but it still seems like a lot
better track record then most systems,
(solaris 2.2 comes to mind <-- shameless anti-plug for a machine I administer)


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

From: james@myhost.subdomain.domain (James Klicman)
Subject: Re: OI and UIB on linux with gcc-2.5.8
Date: 3 Jun 1994 17:00:21 GMT

I had that problem too. Finally I just deleted everything.

I've got gcc-2.5.8 and Slackware Linux.

At tsx-11 there is some patch for 2.5.8 but it didn't help.


- James
- james@ccnet.com 

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


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