Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #316
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:     Sun, 26 Jun 94 15:13:10 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #316, Volume #2                Sun, 26 Jun 94 15:13:10 EDT

Contents:
  Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2 (William Guido Sohne)
  Re: Can Linux mount NeXT filesystem (Jim Robinson)
  Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2 (William Guido Sohne)
  Re: Novell to bundle DOS7/Linux ? (David E. Fox)
  Re: Linux on the DEC Alpha (Alan Herrlich)
  Re: ftape and Conner Backup Basics (Ken Corey)
  Re: Linux on the DEC Alpha (Brandon S. Allbery)

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wgsohne@tucson.Princeton.EDU (William Guido Sohne)
Subject: Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 1994 12:06:40 GMT

In article <2ujmaqINN8tv@umbc9.umbc.edu>, QeyS <mgursk1@umbc.edu> wrote:
>-------------------------------------
>Before anything else is read, let me say I own, run, and love OS/2,
>and as soon as I get more disk space, a Linux partition goes on.
>-------------------------------------

I own OS/2 as well. I just don't run it. In fact, when I decided to give
OS/2 another shot I realized how useful it was. The only problem was that
I was too used to Linux's speed. OS/2 seemed sluggish and that made me
really impatient.

>|>I could either cough up $150 for TCP/IP for OS/2 bringing my total 
>|>investment to almost $350 or could get a better implementation for free. 
>|>Guess which one I chose. So, OS/2 bigot, ya better shut yer mouth.
>|>I have used TCP/IP for OS/2 on an experimental machine in the University. 
>|>What did I find out ? It *sucks*. 
>
>If it was an experimental machine, how do you know everything was
>stable?  Did you check the complete installation of OS/2 and TCP/IP?
>

Good question. However, stability is not the whole problem. Functionality
and performance are the problems. Admittedly, the OS/2 TCP/IP implementation
has its good sides, though. It still does not compare to Linux for stability,
price, speed, and functionality. 

>|>*superior* product for free. It boggles my mind. Perhaps you have 
>|>invested too much in OS/2 to let go ? Tell me, did you get the base 
>|>package only ? 
>
>Well, I've invested a grand total of $100 in OS/2, for the base
>package only.  I use GNU ports of just about everything, use emx for

I take it that you don't use TCP/IP or you did not pay for your copy of OS/2 ?
OS/2 set me back almost $200. I was not about to invest another $150 in it
when I could get superior software for free.

>programming, use DOS stuff when I need it.
>
>|>     a) telnet and ftp to other machines
>|>     b) mount the files on my Unix machine via NFS
>
>Must be nice to be somewhere that has this type of connectivity...  We
>get ROLM phones that hook to a serial port and can't handle their
>advertised 19200 bps....
>

Yeah, we are spoilt :) The University wired all the dorms for ethernet and
all you have to do is buy a network card and subscribe to Dormnet for a fee.
It really makes all kinds of stuff possible and allows students to learn
more about computing. I don't have to walk to SUN cluster to do development.
I always have usage of X and Unix development tools regardless of how busy
the cluster is. Plus, I receive e-mail right in my room :)

Dormnet is inactive during summer so I once more have to go to the clusters.
If it were active I'd invite someone to explore my system and benchmark the
networking programs.
 
>Almost everything I use for OS/2 comes with source as well, except the
>actual OS....
>
>|>Have you ever encountered a bug using OS/2 ? From my experience with OS/2 
>|>I'd say hell yeah. With the source to Linux and all the programs I use 
>|>under it I can fix it myself
>
>I don't think I'd trust myself to patch the source to any OS I was running...
>
Well, if you had the source, you could spend time studying it and come to
understand it. Another friend and I are going to try and implement some
simple distributed filesystem so that we could pool HD space. With Linux, we
could cannibalize the existing FS code since we have the source.

>|>In fact, after using Linux for almost a year and a half, I have 
>|>encountered exactly *one* bug. Only once did Linux crash. But you *paid* 
>|>for an operating system that is bug-infested, huh ? I guess you're a 
>|>pretty smart guy - you think I'm cheap when I'm getting a better deal. 
>|>I'll be laughing all the way to the bank.
>
>Questions: Was Linux developed wholly independently from other Unix
>sources?  How long has it been around?  How many of the earlier
>versions were buggy?
>
Linux was started by Linus Torvalds. He wanted to learn about the 386 chip
and ended up writing a Unix kernel. Many, many people all over the world
have contributed to it and it has evolved into the best kernel for Intel
machines, IMHO. I would hazard a guess that it's less than four years old.

An early kernel, 0.97 patchlevel 1 run without an error or a crash for 136
days and would have run longer if it hadn't been accidentally powered down.
I think the main reason that it's so stable is that as soon as a bug is 
encountered, someone posts on Usenet and it is tracked down within a couple
of days.
 
>|>Free software is cheap, as cheap as it gets.
>
>Some could argue that you get what you pay for.
>

Not always. Solaris x86 which I'm sure you've seen reviews of is much more
buggy than Linux. Not to say Linux is buggy though.
The GNU C compiler is another example. It is free yet is of a much higher
quality than a large proportion of commercial compilers.

>|> When software is cheap *and* 
>|>quality, like Linux itself you have a winner. Why do you think a giant 
>|>like Novell would even look at free software if it weren't obviously 
>|>superior? Run OS/2 non-stop and reboot only to install the next version 
>|>and see how far you'd get.
>
>I power off for thunderstorms, new hardware installations, and reboot
>when I want to play DOOM at a nice speed.
>
>|> Oh, new versions only come out once a year at 
>|>most - so sorry. I get new functionality at least once a month.
>
>What's the use of a new version a month if you've encountered one bug
>in 18 months?
>

The new version usually fixes any bugs that were in the previous version.
On top of that you get new features. For example, as PPP became more popular
it was put into Linux. Out of curiousity, does OS/2 have PPP yet ?

>|>Not so fast here. I was describing a method for those people (which 
>|>happens to be most people) who don't have access to the Linux 
>|>distributions via NFS.
>
>So for most people still, it's nothing but the floppy shuffle.  How
>many diskettes does it take to get to the tootsie roll center of a
>Linux installation for "Most people"?
>

At least I have the option of utilizing my hardware to the full. If you
have a network card, and have access to the install files via NFS, you
can at least have a painless install. Not so with OS/2.

BTW, the university, for security reasons, does not export volumes via NFS
to all hosts. However, since we Linuxers here have control of our own
machines we export NFS to each other. 

>|> It was so before me and my friends installed 
>|>Linux. Now anyone in Princeton University wanting to install Linux needs 
>|>only _2 floppies_.
>

Again, a direct result of our being able to use NFS during install and being 
able to export directories to whomever we want to.

>Must be nice to have a nice network access.  But tell me, if I were
>going to Princeton, would I be able to do this, or would I need some
>sort of network card?
>

You would need an ethernet card. I don't think it is really worth it otherwise.
One can do a little bit with a fast modem but there's a bandwidth threshold
below which the more interesting applications of networks become so painful
to use that they won't be used to their full potential or not at all.

>|> On the day you can install OS/2 using 2 floppy disks only 
>|>on a networked machine could you please give me a call ?
>
>I can install it from one diskette on a non-networked drive.  One
>diskette and one CD-ROM...
>

Linux can do that too. The problem with CDROMs is that using them is like
being in the ages when the world was thought to be flat. You get to the edge 
and you fall off...

>|>Don't forget, I have installed *and* used OS/2 for a good length of time. 
>|>I have also installed and used Linux for a longer time. From my 
>|>experience, Linux is better. Perhaps you went off half cocked, huh ? Tell 
>|>me, have you used Linux in any significant way ? 
>
>Perhaps you should take a walk around campus before replying.  It
>doesn't help your position to be insulting.
>

True. I agree completely. I am much calmer now. It just pissed me off to
experience an attitude that rejected perfectly good software because it
was free. To add insult to injury, I was accused of being a cheapskate.
Some people just don't understand the concept of free software. It's
like in the days when a community would get together and construct a 
schoolhouse for all to use. In this case, it's an intellectual activity,
a pooling of talents. How could that be bad ?

>|>Yeah right. OS/2 and TCP/IP for OS/2 are the best products on the market. 
>|>Maybe if you consider the OS/2 market only. Like I said before, for 
>|>TCP/IP networking Linux is better than OS/2. Spend a few dollars on the 
>|>best product ? Excuse me, but the best product is FREE.
>
>Different strokes for different folks.  How many businesses use Linux?
>

A more appropriate question would be how many businesses use Unix and
what do they use it for. With the Linux SCO binary emulation, I can run
SCO Unix apps. In fact, this summer I'm saving up to buy Wordperfect for
X and Motif. Business apps for Linux exist.


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

From: jimr@shorty.cs.wisc.edu (Jim Robinson)
Subject: Re: Can Linux mount NeXT filesystem
Date: 23 Jun 1994 23:23:24 GMT

In article <Crur2I.3u3@lehman.com> jcolman@lehman.com writes:
>In article 8af@uuneo.neosoft.com, dlogue@starbase.neosoft.com (Dan Logue) writes:
>>
>>Thanks for a response.
>>If possible please answer in the newsgroup because other people might be 
>>interested. (I get tired of seeing the request to answer my e-mail because
>>people don't read the groups often, or some other obscure reason. There are
>>many people on the net who quietly read alot of mail and who may or may not 
>>be interested in the response. )
>>
>
> I agree 100%!!!  Many times I find that I'd be interested in a reply
> only to find that the replies are going E-mail.  I wish there was an
> easy way to strike a good balance.... FWIW

If people ask for e-mail they should make a summary.  I think it would
be ideal if EVERY answer about mundane problems went via email, and
the original poster then posted a summary telling how they solved the
problem.  Of course this does not apply to "discussion" but only
questions about "Does X work with Y." and "It doesn't work. help."

I also think it is rude to say they you won't answer by email, some
people don't even post to the group if the poster asks "please answer
by email." If you know the answer you could be kind enough to post it.
Email them and tell them to make a summary, it is not that hard if you
would have otherwise answered it.


Jim

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wgsohne@stone.Princeton.EDU (William Guido Sohne)
Subject: Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 1994 09:38:22 GMT

In article <361_9406242100@genesplicer.org>,
Mark Woolworth <Mark.Woolworth@choice.genesplicer.org> wrote:
>Hello William
>
>On Jun 24, 1994 you wrote in a message to All:
>
> WGS> The problem with OS/2 then was the absence of TCP/IP.
>
>Since when? You were just to cheap to buy it from IBM. Lets stop the BS! TCP/IP
>is, and has been available for OS/2 for along time. And its one of the nicest
>TCP/IP packages for any OS. But if you are too cheap to buy it, then yes, you
>are not going to be able to use it... Right?
>

Right. There's a sucker born every minute. And you're one.

Who the *HELL* do you think you are calling me cheap ? And who the *HELL*
are you to tell me what is good for me. I had my own budget and went to
the trouble of investing almost $200 in OS/2. What was I rewarded with ?
Crash protection ? Yeah right. I had more crashes using OS/2 than I did
using Windows. I use my computer for writing papers and for programming
assignments. I use remote University computers a lot. It involves a lot 
of Telnetting, FTPing and NFS stuff. 

I could either cough up $150 for TCP/IP for OS/2 bringing my total 
investment to almost $350 or could get a better implementation for free. 
Guess which one I chose. So, OS/2 bigot, ya better shut yer mouth.
I have used TCP/IP for OS/2 on an experimental machine in the University. 
What did I find out ? It *sucks*. 

It seems that you have something against free software. Well, what can I 
say if you're willing to pay for an *inferior* product when you can get a 
*superior* product for free. It boggles my mind. Perhaps you have 
invested too much in OS/2 to let go ? Tell me, did you get the base 
package only ? 

I can:

        a) telnet and ftp to other machines
        b) mount the files on my Unix machine via NFS
        c) run Framemaker and Mathematica for X-Windows on blazingly fast
           machines and have the results displayed on my screen
        d) run thousands of *free* programs with *source*

Have you ever encountered a bug using OS/2 ? From my experience with OS/2 
I'd say hell yeah. With the source to Linux and all the programs I use 
under it I can fix it myself or report it on Usenet and have it fixed 
within two weeks. You OTOH have to live with the bug until some droid at 
Big Blue is assigned to fix it. 

In fact, after using Linux for almost a year and a half, I have 
encountered exactly *one* bug. Only once did Linux crash. But you *paid* 
for an operating system that is bug-infested, huh ? I guess you're a 
pretty smart guy - you think I'm cheap when I'm getting a better deal. 
I'll be laughing all the way to the bank.


> WGS>  Let me describe how I install Linux for those OS/2 users
> WGS> who want to try Linux, TCP/IP, Mosaic and X-Windows - all
> WGS> for free.
>
>See... There is more evidence of what you wanted... FREE SOFTWARE. So lets
>please stop the charade. You wanted FREE SOFTWARE and were simply to cheap to
>go buy a product that was available, and to cover up this fact, you claim
>publicly that the product doesnt exist.
>

So what if I wanted free software ? Let's see here. If someone developed 
a clone of Word for Windows 6.0 or whatever WP you use and made it freely 
available with source are you saying you would pay for the MS article ? 
If you do, you're a candidate for the Nobel prize in Stupidity.

However, if you want to pay for *inferior* stuff, more power to you. I 
have a bug-ridden copy of OS/2 2.1 I do not want. Care to buy it ? I'm 
selling DOS and Windows too.

Free software is cheap, as cheap as it gets. When software is cheap *and* 
quality, like Linux itself you have a winner. Why do you think a giant 
like Novell would even look at free software if it weren't obviously 
superior? Run OS/2 non-stop and reboot only to install the next version 
and see how far you'd get. Oh, new versions only come out once a year at 
most - so sorry. I get new functionality at least once a month.

> WGS>  1) Feed your computer the bootdisk and reboot
> WGS>  2) Insert rootdisk at prompt and hit Enter
> WGS>  3) Follow the instructions on the screen
> WGS>     (It might help the newbie to have the
> WGS> Installation-HOWTO           in hand; however, when I was a
> WGS> newbie I spurned such
> WGS>      stuff and had no problems whatsoever)
>
> WGS> There that's it. You are running Linux. Of course, a lot of
>
>Gee... That sounds exactly like OS/2, Windows and DOS installations! What is so
>new about this? Oh yeah, I forgot... You have to pay for all of these.
>

Not so fast here. I was describing a method for those people (which 
happens to be most people) who don't have access to the Linux 
distributions via NFS. It was so before me and my friends installed 
Linux. Now anyone in Princeton University wanting to install Linux needs 
only _2 floppies_. On the day you can install OS/2 using 2 floppy disks only 
on a networked machine could you please give me a call ?

> WGS> At this point, please note that all this footwork is just to
> WGS> get the Linux stuff onto your machine. If you know how to
>
>And I erased about 50 lines of "footwork" there. Now its beginning to sound
>like that so-called "easy installation" isnt quite so easy. But it was free, so
>you will love it!
>

50 lines of footwork huh ? Puhleeze. All I described was how to FTP stuff 
to your machine and what stuff to FTP. It could be reduced to 20 lines or 
less if I had bothered to write a more sophisticated FTP macro. Even if 
it were 50 lines as you exaggerated it, I bet anyone could type them in 
before the OS/2 installation reached disk 4.

Don't forget, I have installed *and* used OS/2 for a good length of time. 
I have also installed and used Linux for a longer time. From my 
experience, Linux is better. Perhaps you went off half cocked, huh ? Tell 
me, have you used Linux in any significant way ? 

>Its really amazing what people will do and say, in order not to spend a few
>dollars. Even for the best products on the market.
>

Yeah right. OS/2 and TCP/IP for OS/2 are the best products on the market. 
Maybe if you consider the OS/2 market only. Like I said before, for 
TCP/IP networking Linux is better than OS/2. Spend a few dollars on the 
best product ? Excuse me, but the best product is FREE.


>Enjoy your box! I'll enjoy this one. Its paid for. In full!
>

There's a sucker born every minute. And you're one.

>Mark



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

Crossposted-To: comp.unix.unixware
From: root@belvedere.sbay.org (David E. Fox)
Subject: Re: Novell to bundle DOS7/Linux ?
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 17:59:23 GMT

Steven King, Software Archaeologist (king@wildebeest.cig.mot.com) wrote:

: Ever notice that the face on Mars bears a striking resemblance to 
: Linus Torvalds?  And the crop circles in England, when viewed from
: 20,000 feet, look just like permission flags given by 'ls -l'!

Ever notice that a common permission setting in Unix is also the Mark of
the Beast (tm)? Of course, it's in octal, but don't bother us
fundamentalists with trivial technicalities like that.

:                                       --Steven King
:                                       Living in constant fear of
:                                       "umount /dev/earth"
-- 
David Fox                       root@belvedere.sbay.org
5479 Castle Manor Drive
San Jose, CA 95129              Thanks for letting me change
408/253-7992                    magnetic patterns on your hard disk.

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

From: herrlich@ptpm21.tay1.dec.com (Alan Herrlich)
Subject: Re: Linux on the DEC Alpha
Date: 23 Jun 1994 23:47:46 GMT

In article <CrvF0t.12x@ns1.nodak.edu> evers@plains.NoDak.edu (Dwight M Evers) writes:

>   NOTICE, this is an ALPHA "PC", not a AXP!!! Hopefully device drivers for 
>   some of the new 64bit graphics cards will be made available as either a 
>   direct or indirect outgrowth. Then, the average joe _might_ be able to 
>   afford true workstation quality and performance w/o workstation price.

I suspect Dwight is making the destinction between the larger Alpha's,
some of which only run OpenVMS or OSF/1, and the smaller Alpha's, some
of which are extremely PC like hardware-wise. All these machines are
based on the Alpha AXP chip. I suspect that if Linux ran on the "PC"'s
it would run on at least some of the larger Alpha AXP's...  especially
on the ones that run Windows NT. Of course, Linux might have trouble
with the multi-processor Alpha AXP's. :-)

---
Alan Herrlich
Disclaimer: It is not my job to know Digital's hardware nor am I in
any way a Digital spokesperson.
herrlich@microw.enet.dec.com
--
Alan Herrlich    Digital Equipment Corporation, Littleton, MA.
...!decwrl!microw.enet.dec.com!herrlich   herrlich@microw.enet.dec.com

Opinions herein are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of Digital.

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

From: exukenc@exu.ericsson.com (Ken Corey)
Subject: Re: ftape and Conner Backup Basics
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 1994 16:42:08 GMT

Louis-D. Dubeau (hallu@boole.info.polymtl.ca) wrote:
: I have read ftape's doc and the HOWTO. Both says that there was a
: formatting problem with CBB version 1.0 for MS-DOG but that the
: Windogs version never had any problem and that the MS-DOG version 1.1
: should work fine.
: Well, I tried formating my tape with both CBB version 1.1 for DOS ans
: CBB version 1.2 for Win and ftape wasn't able to use the tape.

I have had exactly the same experience so far.

: I instead used cpbackup (the backup from PCTOOLS v7.something) and it
: did work.

I didn't know about this...I just might go buy it.   *grrrrr*

--
Ken Corey   exukenc@exu.ericsson.com  214/907-5841  Speaking for everyone...
 When you're not looking at it, this fortune is written in FORTRAN.

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

From: bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery)
Subject: Re: Linux on the DEC Alpha
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 1994 02:23:53 GMT

In article <2uelse$a89@sousa.amt.ako.dec.com> riebs@tanfl.amt.ako.dec.com (Andrew Riebs) writes:
+---------------
| A number of us are pushing to get to the day where we can the world's only
| *open* operating system, Linux, on the world's fastest desktop systems
+------------->8

I wonder what the NetBSD/FreeBSD folks would say to that.

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery         kf8nh@kf8nh.ampr.org          bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
Friends don't let friends load Windows NT.              Linux iBCS2 emulation

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


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