Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #165
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:     Tue, 24 May 94 15:13:12 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #165, Volume #2                Tue, 24 May 94 15:13:12 EDT

Contents:
  Re: A good NFS server ? (Harry Skelton)
  Terminal on hacked LGX won't work... (Darrell Fuhriman)
  Re: software communists was Re: BRIEF/vi Compatible GUI Text Editor (Matt Welsh)
  Re: Wait'll you see the May 16th PCWEEK... (Tim Smith)
  GCC as cross compiler on Linux (Allan Adler)
  Who are you & What do you do w/ Linux (Paul JY Lahaie)
  Why Novell cares. (Russell Nelson)
  Re: Term: Question about 'tredir' (Alex Ramos)
  Re: Linux and Bernoulli? (Rick Roberts)
  Re: software communists was Re: BRIEF/vi Compatible GUI Text Editor (Tim Smith)
  Re: Virtual consoles > 12? (S.G. de Bruijn)
  Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big (Mark Evans)
  Re: software communists was Re: BRIEF/vi Compatible GUI Text Editor (Tim Smith)
  Re: Linux for the masses? (WordProcessing again) (Leslie Mikesell)
  Re: FSSTND and hard-disk partitioning (Stuart Herbert)
  Performance Measurement Utilities (David H Dennis)
  Re: GETTING LINUX VIA 3.5" (Michael A Iverson)

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.unix.unixware,comp.unix.solaris
From: zorba@netcom.com (Harry Skelton)
Subject: Re: A good NFS server ?
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 13:24:20 GMT

In article <9405231810.aa19618@dis.demon.co.uk> peter@dis.demon.co.uk (peter) writes:
>
>ROTFL :) Unixware a good NFS server. sigh. That's like saying SCO Unix
>has a good TCP/IP implementation. sigh.

Just like AT&T (Wollengong(sp?)) TCP/IP? :-)  

*Sigh* I'll be glad to get back to a 'real' Unix after dealing with MP-RAS.
-- 
     Harry Skelton - 1609 Hinton Court - Virginia Beach, Virginia 23464
                 Home: 804-467-0743 -- Work: 804-440-4462
     Copyright (C) 1994 by Harry Skelton and protected under 18 USC 508

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

From: darrell@efn.org (Darrell Fuhriman)
Subject: Terminal on hacked LGX won't work...
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 06:57:57 GMT

I'm trying to get an old terminal to hook up (so my friend can MUD while 
I do real work :)  ).

Run down of equipment:

Kernel 1.1.3
The Serial port is ttyS2 on IRQ 5

I've tried stock getty and getty_ps, both to no avail.

relevant sections of various files:

/etc/inittab
#ttyS2:unknown:/etc/getty_ps ttyS2 DT9600
ttyS2:unknown:/etc/getty 9600 ttyS2

When using getty_ps this comes in on syslog.err after typing something on 
the terminal:

May 23 23:54:05 fiziks getty[311]: warning: INIT sequence failed on /dev/ttyS2
May 23 23:54:42 fiziks getty[315]: warning: INIT sequence failed on /dev/ttyS2
May 23 23:55:18 fiziks getty[319]: warning: INIT sequence failed on /dev/ttyS2

/etc/gettydefs (when using getty_ps)
DT9600# B9600 CS8 CLOCAL # B9600 SANE -ISTRIP CLOCAL #S @L login: #DT9600

What am I doing wrong?  

-- 
Darrell Fuhriman
"Hi mom!"



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

From: mdw@cs.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh)
Subject: Re: software communists was Re: BRIEF/vi Compatible GUI Text Editor
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 16:37:21 GMT

In article <1994May24.001335.555@escape.widomaker.com> shendrix@escape.widomaker.com (C. S. Hendrix) writes:
>: For one thing, software companies love to misle us into these things
>: called "upgrades". Upgrades are a wondeful ploy to make your software
>: obsolete, so you can spend another $100 to get the new version.
>: MS-Windows 2.0 suited the needs of many, many people, yet nearly everyone
>: moved to 3.0 and then 3.1. Why? 
>
>Because 2.0 did NOT serve the needs of many.  3.0 was a HUGE improvement
>over 2.0.  Not that either is all that great underneath but you cannot
>possibly be serious if you say that there was no legitimate reason for
>3.0 and 3.1.

Pardon---that statement was intended (partially) as a joke.

>You are right about the upgrade ploy being used but don't assume that
>ALL upgrades are such deceptions. 

I don't.

>: It serves a purpose as long as software is developed that can be shared.
>: It's not so much an argument between "right" and "wrong", but that,
>: technically, free software is better because many people have the ability
>: to develop and contribute to it. 
>
>Not if it fails to serve the needs of the users.  

In the case of Linux, the users of free software are responsible for 
its development. Free software is shared among the community, and 
everyone has the ability (some would say the responsibility) to develop it.

>Also, what about
>companies that write excellent software, provide support, their upgrades
>actually make sense, and their pricing is fair?  

Good for them. I dare say that this is the exception, not the norm. 
Linux (and much free software in general) is where it is today because
everyone has the chance to contribute. If something doesn't work, then
we can fix it. You don't have the choice to do that in the case of 
commercial software; you are subject to the whims of the company releasing
the product. And don't assume that the company's goals are anywhere near
the user's. AIX is a good example of this.

>How is free software
>better for their users?  In general common users have more influence
>over software in the commercial market than they do in the free software
>arena. 

Of course---by _buying_ it. In the free software world users have equal 
influence; if not by developing, then by supporting it, making it part of 
their daily lives. The thousands (millions?) of Emacs users have a vested 
interest in seeing Emacs improve. If they can't modify the code themselves
they can at least exert pressure as a community to see new features 
emerge.

>Free software currently is more geared to programmers and most
>new features are the ideas of programmers, not end users.  

And not marketing reps. 

>End users
>have a hard time influencing the software.  

I don't think that this is the case. It's considerably harder for
end users to influence commercial software. No company is going to
implement a new feature based on the suggestions or complaints of
a few users. 

>So what we have is users that like UNIX and need the kind of power it
>offers.  But the software they need often isn't there and they can't
>seem to communicate with the programmers to get what they want.  

I don't think that this is the core reason for the apparent
complexity of the UNIX interface. It has a lot more to do with
power and flexibility. UNIX applications take the philosophy that
each program should do a specific task, and that there should be
a well-defined mechanism for programs working together. A word 
processor is one of those applications that tries to do everything 
itself, which goes against the philosophy on which UNIX was founded. 
Some would argue that UNIX as an operating system isn't even geared
for those kinds of applications---the operating system lends itself
to the "right" philosophy.

>Well, the current software is not likely to change if you keep
>commercial developers away from an OS like Linux.  They'll just ignore
>it and it will go away.  

Why is commercial development necessary for Linux to prosper? Only if you
have visions of Linux actually competing in the marketplace---as many
do---is this important. While I tend to agree that commercial development
and support is a good thing, it's not NECESSARY. Linux can do just fine
as an operating systems written by and for hackers. Unfortunately there's
a great deal of pressure to see Linux become something "more" than this,
but in order for Linux to really win in that area you have to get the
support of the developers (Linus and the rest) who may not share that
vision. Or, you have to pick it up and develop it yourself, which is
one of the things that Linux International is doing. 

>If you really want the concept of free software
>to do well, meet the rest of the world half-way.  

Do "well" in what respect? Linux doesn't have to take over the 
software world to do "well". 

>If you really want free software to be the norm, You are going to have
>to start supplying what users need.  

Linux is but one example of free software. Arguably it is not as
geared towards the needs of its users---it is still primarily 
oriented towards its developers. That's fine with me. I'd rather
see much more robust, less ad-hoc projects such as Hurd or Wine
be used as strong allies in the war for free software. Linux is
very powerful, yes, but it may not be the best example to use,
because it still adheres closely to the needs of the developers.
If users doesn't like that attitude, they can begin to contribute as
developers to change the trend ("If you can't beat 'em, join 'em"). 

>So what is wrong with some commercial companies offering their products
>for an OS like Linux?  It may very well be the ticket to making free
>software a more widely accepted idea.  

Yes, but there is a downfall---once commercial products begin to 
replace the free software (as may very well be the case with Novell's 
Corsair vis-a-vis Linux) you've turned the sword upon yourself. 

mdw

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

From: tzs@u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: Wait'll you see the May 16th PCWEEK...
Date: 24 May 1994 14:17:53 GMT

Peter Desnoyers <peterd@pjd.dev.cdx.mot.com> wrote:
>Also, as someone has pointed out, Novell has little interest in
>breaking the "shrink-wrap" part of the GPL - they depend on this sort
>of license for their own proprietary software.

GPL is not at all like a "shrink-wrap" license as used by Novell.  The
difference is in the direction they go.  If there were no license or
agreement, the user of software would be allowed to do certain things
without violating copyright (e.g., make backup copies, make adaptations
necessary to use the software).  The effect of a purported license
agreement must be measured against this background of allowed use.

With GPL, the license allows the user to do things beyond what is
allowed by copyright.  If the user does those things, the only thing
that saves them from violating copyright is their agreement to the
GPL.  Doing the acts that would violate copyright but for acceptance
of the terms of GPL therefore would probably be taken by a court as
acceptance by the user of the GPL, including its restrictions.

With the usual commercial shrink-wrap, on the other hand, the license
doesn't allow you to do anything beyond what is allowed by copyright.
Instead, it disallows some things that absent a license would be
legitimate.  In this case, there is no way that use of the product
can be taken as indicating acceptance of the license--it only
indicates exercise of the user's rights as a purchaser of copyrighted
material.

It's sort of like this.  Suppose I place an ad in the paper: "For
Sale!  1989 Honda Civic LX, $7000.  Accept this offer by throwing
a brick through my bedroom window."  If you read this ad, and then
throw a brick through my window, we've probably got a contract.
On the other hand, if my ad said "...Accept this offer by going to
the market and buying a jug of milk" and you go and buy milk, I'm
not going to be able to claim we have a contract.  The first case is
like GPL, and the second is like typical commercial shrink-wrap.

--Tim Smith

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

From: ara@zurich.ai.mit.edu (Allan Adler)
Subject: GCC as cross compiler on Linux
Date: 24 May 94 14:12:01



I've posted a related article on a GCC group, but I think it is appropriate
to post  my question here too.

A couple of nights ago, I installed some C code for a simulator for
the nonexistent machine MIX that DOnald Knuth invented in his
Art of Computer Programming. It works pretty well.

Now I would like to use GCC as a cross compiler running on a PC/linux
to compile C programs intended to run on the nonexistent MIX machine.

I will make the MIX simulator source available to anyone who likes
the idea of this project. If anyone has experience using GCC as
a cross compiler on Linux, I would be especially interested in
their comments.

I lack the time and skill right now to configure GCC to do this,
but I will be very interested in studying the configuration files
that people come up with and with discussing it with them.

Allan Adler
ara@altdorf.ai.mit.edu

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

From: Paul_Lahaie@achilles.net (Paul JY Lahaie)
Subject: Who are you & What do you do w/ Linux
Date: Tue, 24 May 94 13:44:46 GMT


    I'm a 20-year old CS student at Ottawa University.  And I picked up Linux 
when it was at 0.11 because Minix 1.3 didn't like my IDE controller.  And 
patching up to 1.5.10 on floppies was not something very pleasant.

   I now run 2 Linux machines which are used to provide Internet connectivity 
to the Ottawa region.  One is the 'BBS' machine, and the other is the News 
server & MUD machine.  Wouldn't of been possible without Linux.

                                                                         - Paul

--
pjlahaie@achilles.net
Achilles Network Services technical contact


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

From: nelson@crynwr.crynwr.com (Russell Nelson)
Subject: Why Novell cares.
Date: 24 May 1994 16:17:58 GMT

In article <2rsdkn$gne@crl.crl.com> bhogan@crl.com (Bill Hogan) writes:

   [ much more -- go read his article under the subject "Re: software ]
   [ communists was Re: BRIEF/vi Compatible GUI Text Editor" ]

     You heard me right, gentlemen, we are going to give away operating
   systems that support our networking products -- well, not exactly _give_
   them away -- we will package the stuff real nice, maybe tweak it a little
   bit, but basically we will be selling it at cost. 

But it's even better than that.  Microsoft's money comes from selling
DOS/Windows to *everyone* who buys a PC.  The computer sellers would
*love* to dump DOS/Windows and save themselves what? $20-30 per
machine?  So here comes Novell saying "hey guys, here's the operating
system.  It's free.  We're selling a nice integrated application over
it that runs DOS and Windows programs."

The distribution channel is going to eat this up.

--
-russ <nelson@crynwr.com>      ftp.msen.com:pub/vendor/crynwr/crynwr.wav
Crynwr Software   | Crynwr Software sells packet driver support | ask4 PGP key
11 Grant St.      | +1 315 268 1925 (9201 FAX)    | Quakers do it in the light
Potsdam, NY 13676 | LPF member - ask me about the harm software patents do.

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

From: ramos@engr.latech.edu (Alex Ramos)
Subject: Re: Term: Question about 'tredir'
Date: 24 May 1994 18:16:45 GMT

F W Fox (cs_d613@king.ac.uk), quoted out of context, wrote:

> Has anyone managed to set tredir up so that you can telnet back from
> the remote machine to your local?
> I've tried it like the manual page says (sorta  % tredir 2023 23)
> and it just comes back with connection refused.

Be sure is your internet daemon is configured and running.
Does "telnet 127.0.0.1" work on the local machine?

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

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.help
From: ricrob@metronet.com (Rick Roberts)
Subject: Re: Linux and Bernoulli?
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 17:34:26 GMT

In article <2ron8s$fk3@orion.cc.andrews.edu>,
Edsel Adap <adap@andrews.edu> wrote:
>
>Hi!
>Is there any way I can get linux to recognize my bernoulli 90?  Is
>anyone working on a device driver for it?
>
>thanks.
>-- 
> Edsel Adap                         Computer Science / Mathematics Major
> adap@andrews.edu                   Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI
>
>The Briggs/Chase Law of Program Development:


If you have an Iomega interface card (PC2B) you can purchase a UNIX driver
from Iomega for $100.  They only support AT&T and SCO UNIX.  I am attempting
to use their driver with Linux.  Since I am new at this sort of thing, it
will probably take a while.  What I need to do is recompile the Linux
kernel with the driver.  Also included with the drivers are some utilities
for formatting disks, etc.  I am so far unable to get Linux to recognize these
as executables.  Any help would be appreciated.

Since the drivers are not freely distributed I would guess that a kernel
compiled using them could not be freely distributed.  However, if it's
just a matter of buying the drivers and recompiling the kernel, that's
pretty painless.

The people I talked with at Iomega never heard of Linux.

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

From: tzs@u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: software communists was Re: BRIEF/vi Compatible GUI Text Editor
Date: 24 May 1994 18:25:13 GMT

Matt Welsh <mdw@cs.cornell.edu> wrote:
>software. When you give in to commercial software, particularly
>operating systems, you aren't aiding the free software world for
>providing anything better. Free software only improves as long as

So?  When I play rogue I'm not aiding the free software world, either.
What is your point?

--Tim Smith

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

From: debruijn@cs.utwente.nl (S.G. de Bruijn)
Subject: Re: Virtual consoles > 12?
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 08:03:57 GMT

Jon Freivald (jaf@jaflrn.Morse.Net) wrote:
: I've messed around and played with the number of VC's available.
: Everything (so far) works great, except, how do I get to a VC that's
: greater than 12?  i.e., currently I'm running 13, and X uses 13 quite
: nicely, but if I switch to any other, I can never figure out how to
: get back... :(  Any hints?

I never tried this, but I think it is RightAlt-F[1-12] for vc 13--24

Steef
==============
S.G. de Bruijn
Twente University of Technology, Dept. of Computer Science 
E-Mail: debruijn@cs.utwente.nl
=============================== @@ ===============================
signature: file not found

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

Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss
From: evansmp@mb52112.aston.ac.uk (Mark Evans)
Subject: Re: Novell is trying to Sell a derivative of Linux for a big
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 17:12:07 GMT

Jacques Gelinas (jack@solucorp.qc.ca) wrote:

: 3-Linux is like X. Nobody has won trying to defeat X with a better
: X. Sun lately has droped its X/news stuff because it could not stay
: current with X (They were still on R4 while R5 was there for some time).

And it is a pain when Sun apps will only display on a Sun machine.
Kind of defeats quite a bit of the X client server model.

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

From: tzs@u.washington.edu (Tim Smith)
Subject: Re: software communists was Re: BRIEF/vi Compatible GUI Text Editor
Date: 24 May 1994 18:32:12 GMT

Matt Welsh <mdw@cs.cornell.edu> wrote:
>If large companies such as Novell begin to depend upon the efforts of
>volunteer programmers to produce a commercial operating system, they
>have two choices: a) Put pressure on us to develop what they need; or b)
>To take development into their own hands and obsolesce the work that we
>have done. 

a) Ignore them if you don't want to develop what they want.

b) Novell is evil because they might be better than you at programming!?

--Tim Smith

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

From: les@MCS.COM (Leslie Mikesell)
Subject: Re: Linux for the masses? (WordProcessing again)
Date: 24 May 1994 13:12:29 -0500

In article <2rsmft$mtc@sirius.cs.pdx.edu>, Mike Harvey <mike@cs.pdx.edu> wrote:

>>Postscript. Even more universal than TeX.

>What about people who don't have postscript printers (like me)?  I use a
>24-pin dot matrix, which suits my needs (I seldom need graphics or fancy
>fonts).  Can postscript be printed on such a printer [easily]?

If GNU Ghostscript supports it you can print postscript easily (perhaps
not efficiently).

>One nice
>thing about Word Perfect is that it uses each printer's native capabilities
>to their fullest potential.  For instance, it would be a pain for me to
>have to print ordinary text (including bold, italics, etc) in graphics
>mode at s-l-o-w speed, when these are built-in.

That turns out to be not such a good thing when you swap documents around
with people using different printers with different fonts.  WP attempts
to cope with this but it doesn't work very well.

>Forgive my ignorance of postscript... but if the program doesn't support
>their hardware, people won't use it.  I know lots of people who use line
>printers simply because their word-processing needs are simple.  Perhaps
>LWPS should have the option to output *roff codes?

Postscript is becoming a common interchange format.  With Ghostscript you
can print it on many different printers, and Ghostview handles viewing
under X nicely.  The only real problem is that the fonts supplied with
GS are pretty bad.  You can drop in Adobe's ATM set if you want to
pay for them.  Has anyone found a free alternative that comes close to
the stock laserwriter plus font set?

>WP 5.1 style pulldown menus would be nice on a console, but too slow on a
>terminal.  For slow terminals, how about lotus-style menus?  Its primitive
>but simple and already familiar to many people.  Instead of '/' use ESC.
>To increase display speed it could be abbreviated BBS-style.

Bare ESC's are always a problem if you want to support arrow and
function keys on terminals.

Les Mikesell
  les@mcs.com

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

From: ac3slh@sunc.sheffield.ac.uk (Stuart Herbert)
Subject: Re: FSSTND and hard-disk partitioning
Date: 24 May 1994 17:19:39 GMT

Scott Barker (barkers@cuug.ab.ca) wrote:
: Well, I've just read over version 1.0 of the linux file system standard, and
: noticed that it made somewhat of an implication that there be separate
: partitions for root (/), /usr, and /var (and possibly /home).

How can you get hold of a copy of the FSSTND?

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

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin
From: dhd@netcom.com (David H Dennis)
Subject: Performance Measurement Utilities
Date: Tue, 24 May 1994 15:12:16 GMT

I picked up a copy of the O'Reilly book 'System Performance Tuning' so
that I could get a better sense for the health of my system.  It
refers to utilities offered bin Berkley Unix and System V to gauge my
system's status.

These are iostat (disk statistics), sar (CPU usage), prdaily and
perfmeter.  Anyone know if these utilities or things like them are
available for Linux?

Thanks!

D


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

From: miverson@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Michael A Iverson)
Subject: Re: GETTING LINUX VIA 3.5"
Date: 24 May 1994 18:13:19 GMT

Good Luck !
Mike
-- 
****__Michael Iverson___________________________****
 ****__iverson@ee.eng.ohio-state.edu_____________****
  ****__The Department of Electrical Engineering__****
   ****__The Ohio State University_________________****

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


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