Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #318
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 22:15:01 EDT

Linux-Misc Digest #318, Volume #2                Sun, 26 Jun 94 22:15:01 EDT

Contents:
  Mine did blow up! (Re: Will my Computer Blow Up?) (Mark Metson)
  Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2 (ron@crew.de)
  Re: Linux and UltraStor 34F SCSI Controller (Alan Laird)
  Re: QIC tape drives (Alan Laird)
  Re: Linux.... On a Sparc? (Lewis E. Wolfgang)
  Re: Can a DOS virus harm my linux partition? (na8520d00-Nichols)
  Re: How to split large tar file to fit on floppy (Robert Osterlund)
  Re: Umsdos+Swap (Wallace Roberts)
  Re: Slackware 1.2.0 and Mitsumi CDROM (Peter Desnoyers)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (Colin Dunn)
  Screen Capture/Grabber for X? (Tim Smith)
  Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing (William Guido Sohne)
  Re: S3 Support - A bit lacking? (Brian Wellington)

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

From: gpurdy@fox.nstn.ns.ca (Mark Metson)
Subject: Mine did blow up! (Re: Will my Computer Blow Up?)
Date: 25 Jun 1994 04:18:42 -0300
Reply-To: gpurdy@fox.nstn.ns.ca

Friends suggested I should have made a tee-shirt picture of the i/o card that
was in this box, after running linux; with the slogan "the Power of Linux!".

The largest, central chip of the multi-i/o card litterally 'blew out'. It
looked like after-earthquake or something, plus burns on the pins on one side.
Looked like the insides just couldnt fit inside anymore and blew the top of
the chip open. In only about one month of running Linux!

This was a do-everything card - IDE, floppy, 2 serial, 1 parallel, and a games
port. It had sat in the machine a year or two with only a boot-from-floppy
very very occasionally, the machine acting as a dumb-terminal with no HD.
Then one day, we stick in another 4 meg of RAM to bring it to 5 meg, toss in
an 80-meg and a 230-meg IDE, hook to the Internet and do three FTP downloads
at once while reading news posting mail and transferring stuff at 19200 baud
over a serial line to another machine, hour after hour.. Heh heh poor thing,
just about time for the warranty to expire - but so spectacularly?

The after-effects: even with two brand new such cards now in here, and a brand
new floppy drive, it wont read floppies. (The 3.5" that was in it at the time
of the blowup hasnt worked since; but the new drive will work on another
machine just fine. We have tried different cards, different cables, different
drive, different cable from the power-supply; what else could be preventing
floppy use?)

Hey, linux is POWERFUL ;-)

Blessed Be. -MarkM-

--
Mark Metson              How many mystics does it take to bring Peace on Earth?
gpurdy@fox.nstn.ns.ca    Only one - but each one has to do it for themself.....
===============================================================================
This posting is 'software for wetware' placed under version 2 of the GNU public
license. intent being: IF YOU DISTRIBUTE IT YOU CANNOT RESTRICT REDISTRIBUTION!
(This is a GNU-ware .signature: please re-use and re-cycle!)
===============================================================================

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

From: ron@crew.de
Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
Subject: Re: TCP/IP: The reason I dumped OS/2
Date: 26 Jun 1994 20:47:31 GMT
Reply-To: ron@crew.de

In <1994Jun25.093822.24697@Princeton.EDU>, wgsohne@stone.Princeton.EDU (William Guido Sohne) writes:

[munch]

>On the day you can install OS/2 using 2 floppy disks only 
>on a networked machine could you please give me a call ?
>

No problem, I can do and have done. Two disks. No more, no less.

Hendrik

p.s. E-mail me for a list of needed files and a sample config.sys
     -- and by the way - I really do not like your tone ...

---
Hendrik H. Fulda                    IBM Certified OS/2 Engineer, TeamOS/2
e-mail: ron@crew.de, ron@chaos-hh.zer                  OS/2 EDAP & DevCon
---

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

From: laird@cauchy.sosc.osshe.edu (Alan Laird)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Re: Linux and UltraStor 34F SCSI Controller
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 20:08:27 GMT

>Has anyone had the problem that I described in an earlier post?  (sorry to
>keep posting the query)?  Now that my 34F recognizes the drives, (after
>moving the address to 0x340), it still hangs during the boot sequence, and
>displays the following:

>scsi0: reseting for 2nd half of retries.
>US14F: reset: called

>I haven't seen this problem described anywhere.

>Thanks in advance,

>patrick


Hello Patrick,
     I get exactly this problem when my cdrom is plugged in.  If I disconnect 
the scsi cable to the drive, it works fine.  This is not a solution, this is a 
problem.  Is this similar to your problem?  I have one scsi hd at id 0 and one 
cdrom drive at id 2.

Alan
=======================================================================
Alan Laird                      =   And everything under the sun is   =
Computer Science                =   in tune, but the sun is eclipsed  =
Southern Oregon State College   =   by the moon.                      =
laird@cauchy.sosc.osshe.edu     =                                     =
=======================================================================

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

From: laird@cauchy.sosc.osshe.edu (Alan Laird)
Subject: Re: QIC tape drives
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 20:13:27 GMT

In article <2u73pd$4v6@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk> rda@eng.cam.ac.uk (R.D. Auchterlounie) writes:
Hello,
    i just purchased a colorado 700 from JEM in Boston fo $99 with controller. 
 I have no idea if it is supported under linux or not but it is a fairly 
standard qic02 controller and the drive will put 350 meg uncompressed on a 
6525 tape.  :)

Alan




=======================================================================
Alan Laird                      =   And everything under the sun is   =
Computer Science                =   in tune, but the sun is eclipsed  =
Southern Oregon State College   =   by the moon.                      =
laird@cauchy.sosc.osshe.edu     =                                     =
=======================================================================

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux,comp.os.linux.help
From: wolfgang@sunspot.nosc.mil (Lewis E. Wolfgang)
Subject: Re: Linux.... On a Sparc?
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 1994 20:38:18 GMT

In article <2ua7pc$anv@blackbird.db.erau.edu>,
Andrew Anderson <andersoa@news.db.erau.edu> wrote:
>I agree.  My '66 will do loops around a Sparc 10...an operation that took
>45 minutes on a Sparc-10 only took about 2 or 3 on my Pentium!

Would you please document your "operation" so that others could try to
replicate it and report their experiences?  If your claim can be replicated
it would make the Pentium significantly faster than ANY other CPU, including
PA-RISC and ALPHA.

When you document your operation, also please include the running environment,
such as which operating systems were used, local/network disks, languages,
GUIs, memory available, system loads, and such.

                                        Thanks in advance,
                                        Lewie Wolfgang


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

From: rnichols@ih4ehw.ih.att.com (na8520d00-Nichols)
Subject: Re: Can a DOS virus harm my linux partition?
Reply-To: rnichols@ihlpm.ih.att.com
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 1994 02:54:25 GMT

In article <1994Jun24.012255.4144@taylor.infi.net>,
Mark A. Davis <mark@taylor.infi.net> wrote:
>spin@netcom.com (Nancy Perry) writes:
>
>>This may be a stupid question, but I just have to know.  If my 
>>DOS partition gets a virus, is my linux partition in jeopardy?
>
>Not if you don't boot up MS-"DOS" after that point :)

A DOS virus could use absolute disk writes to corrupt any part of the
drive.  It wouldn't be able to do anything meaningful with files in a
Linux partition, so it couldn't replicate itself that way, but it could
certainly corrupt the data.

The only data that would be reasonably safe would be that on the 3rd
(or higher) hard drive or data above the 1024 cylinder boundary,
assuming that you weren't running a DOS driver capable of accessing
these areas.

--
Bob Nichols
AT&T Bell Laboratories
rnichols@ihlpm.ih.att.com

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

From: spcberto@psyche.spc.uchicago.edu (Robert Osterlund)
Subject: Re: How to split large tar file to fit on floppy
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 1994 02:51:27 GMT

Try:

% split -b 1440k <bigfile>

This will split <bigfile> into smaller files called 'xaa', 'xab', 'xac', etc.,
each 1440k in length.  cp these to floppies.  Combine them later again
using:

% cat xaa xab xac ... > <bigfile>

This is simple, and it works.  In fact, I employed this method just today
to transfer gcc-2.5.8 home, where I am now proceeding with the make.

(The tar -M option failed me the other day for inexplicable reasons.)

Bob Osterlund
spcberto@psyche.spc.uchicago.edu
SSPPCC, U of Chicago



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

From: robertsw@agcs.com (Wallace Roberts)
Subject: Re: Umsdos+Swap
Date: 26 Jun 1994 17:32:24 -0700

In article <2udgqb$ovs@cronkite.ocis.temple.edu> rostam@astro.ocis.temple.edu (Eugene Mesgar) writes:
>John Bryan (jhonsrid@drealm.drealm.org) wrote:
>:  
>: Btw, the youngest linux user I know is 15. Is that some kind of record?
>:  
>
>I started Linux when I was 14, Now I am 15. I installed it about 5 months
>ago.. I love it..

my stepson (rob) installed the fall of '93 yggdrasil release while he was
still 14 yrs old.  i brought it home & laid it on the kitchen counter.
he entered the kitchen & the following conversation ensued:

rob: what's that?
me : linux.
rob: that's only the manual; where's the floppies?
me : it's on a cd, inside the manual's cover.
rob: <grabs manual, heads for his bedroom> later...

<...1/2 hour passes...>

rob: <running out of room>  what's root password?
me : why do you want root password?
rob: 'cause i want to tune my system!
me : !!!

he asked me to get x running for him; i fiddled about for awhile, to no
avail.  i gave up, telling him i'd figure it out "tomorrow."  later that
night, he got x running, too.

for his 14th birthday we bought him a multimedia kit with a cdrom drive,
soundblaster pro card, etc.  he installed it himself in 1/2 hour,
including reconfiguring irq's, w/o any help from me.  the only time i
heard from him was when he was ready to show it off... :->

he's not an old hacker, either; he received the computer for his 13th
birthday so he's only been at this for 2 yrs.  in those 2 short yrs he's
installed several versions of messy-dog, whine-doze, & even os/2.  he
prefers linux; i wonder why?  :-)

when i witness his eagerness & ability with computers, then realize that
there are many homes out there with teenagers just like him, i have
little fear for the future of our world.

btw, if y'all would like to surprise him, send him some email; his
internet address is:

        rvan@hndymn.stat.com (Rob)

i'm sure he'd be pleased to hear from other net.teens... :-D

gears,
ye wilde ryder
--
robertsw@agcs.com | 86 cr250 "dirt devil"    83 v65 magna "animal"
"E Pluribus Unix" | 79 it250 "mr. reliable"  84 650 nighthawk ">> for sale <<"
"Criminals (especially tyrants) prefer unarmed victims."
"Ignorance can be cured; stupidity, on the other hand, is hereditary."

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

From: peterd@pjd.dev.cdx.mot.com (Peter Desnoyers)
Subject: Re: Slackware 1.2.0 and Mitsumi CDROM
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 1994 18:22:29 GMT

sysop@comet.sb.sub.de writes:

>Hi,
>i`ve got a problem, hope you can help me...

>I installed Slackware 1.2.0 from CDROM Mitsumi Double Speed.
>Works fine, even the Installation from CDROM.
>But after installing, when i use the system, i have
>no chance to use my CDROM.
>I want to install a part of Linux after the main installation,
>but no CD-Rom can be mounted...
>With the same setup-programm on the installed Linux, it can not mount.

This is a common problem. (I had it at first...) Slackware comes with
installation (i.e. floppy-based) kernels that support all sorts of
drives, including the Mitsumi. However, it only has a couple of normal
kernels that you can install for real, and they don't support the
Mitsumi.

The solution is to go to /usr/src/linux, read the README file, and
follow the directions to rebuild your kernel. It's really not
difficult - the commands are (from memory):

 make configure
 make dep
 make zImage
 mv /vmlinuz /vmlinuz.old
 mv zImage /vmlinuz
 /etc/lilo/install

The first step will ask you lots of configuration questions - make
sure you tell it 'yes' for ISO9660 support and the Mitsumi driver.

                                Peter Desnoyers
-- 

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: dunnc@ucsub.Colorado.EDU (Colin Dunn)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 1994 20:08:31 GMT

wgsohne@tucson.Princeton.EDU (William Guido Sohne) writes:

>Yes. Or is a Dell computer not 'compatible' enough ? OS/2 was obviously the
>problem here.

I share this frustration. I spent money to get an Adaptec brand SCSI
controller, and found that the newest OS/2 (2.11, the service pack)
outright broke the device driver. My system will crash with a TRAP 0008
any time I boot. Had to go back to the old driver to make the problem
go away.

OS/2 is the problem, more than people would like to believe. Even reputable
brand-name hardware can be "incompatible." Really, it seems IBM does not
even test their device drivers. I had similar problems (tight lock-ups)
using the Tseng ET4000 drivers for OS/2 2.10 as well.

I think device drivers should have to be beta-tested like anything else.
If IBM feels otherwise, it's time to drop OS/2.

>Stop trying to blame OS/2's crashes on hardware. Such propaganda will
>only make some poor guy believe hardware is the solution. If it crashes on
>a Dell computer then most likely it will crash Joe User's machine too 
>when using the same software.
>BTW, I'll bet Linux demands more of the hardware. It has to since it 
>performs so much better and quicker than OS/2. By doing more work, it 
>stresses the system more. OS/2 is a good system. It's not nearly as great 
>as you think it is though. The HPFS support is a kludge.

I have always wondered about the talk about "OS/2 demanding more of the
hardware" than Windows 3.1. After all, Windows also "multitasks" (though
it uses an inferior algorithm to do so). Windows also hits on video cards,
sound cards, etc. And on my system, which I hand-picked out of decent
components, I still get a lot more crashes in OS/2 than in Windows 3.1.
I wish this weren't so; I would prefer OS/2's multitasking any day.

As for Linux, I plan to get a CD-ROM with it soon ... but I am not very
familiar with the UNIX environment and won't get to use it very much ... yet.

>Well, if I could get prices like yours and free software from IBM too, I 
>would still stay with Linux. It works faster and does more of what I want.

>What crash protection ? We all know it's a bad joke. In theory, OS/2 can
>eliminate lots of crashes. Problem is when a PM app crashes it can bring 
>down the system.

Not to mention DOS/Windows applications that bring down the entire system.
I saw one OS/2 system in which running the DOS version of Telix would
cause the whole system to lock up tight -- so tight it required a hardware
reset. Then, of course, OS/2's Workplace Shell and .INI files got screwed
up, and the system got less and less stable every day.

>Yeah. I, for one, want to be DOS free. DOOM and the occasional paper keep me
>from doing away with it altogether. I want to run programs that take full 
>advantage of my machine and are not hobbled by an ancient OS. That's why 
>I'm getting rid of DOS as soon as I save up enough to get WordPerfect for X.

I wish someone would write a good, small, fast, stable multitasking OS
with broad-based device driver support. This kind of OS would destroy
OS/2, Windows 3.1, Chicago, NT, etc. I have always wondered why the new
OSs for PCs are so bloated, slow, and crash-prone. Maybe the best solution
is not to try to support old applications in some emulation mode (such as
the OS/2 DOS box or Windows 3.1 DOS sessions) and simply provide a mechanism
for users to boot whichever OS they need to use their applications.





Colin Dunn
dunnc@ucsu.colorado.edu


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

From: tcsmith@csi.nb.ca (Tim Smith)
Subject: Screen Capture/Grabber for X?
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 1994 17:59:55

Hello All,

Does anyone know where I could find a Screen Capture program for X?

-Tim Smith 

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.os2.advocacy
From: wgsohne@tucson.Princeton.EDU (William Guido Sohne)
Subject: Re: Linux better than OS/2 for net surfing
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 1994 14:15:39 GMT

In article <27b_9406260300@genesplicer.org>,
Mark Woolworth <Mark.Woolworth@choice.genesplicer.org> wrote:
>Hello William
>
>On Jun 25, 1994 you wrote in a message to All:
>
>Hell, you went so close to doing it yourself, I really didnt need to! What did
>you say about 6 times throughout that message? This is free and that is free,
>and this is free and that is free, ect...
>

Well, price is always something people consider when choosing a software
package. When someone finds excellent software at the lowest of prices -
$0.00, wouldn't he/she find that amazing and pleasing? In my case, I had
already spent enough on software, upgrading old software, buying new
software etc. I could take matters into my own hands and help improve the
programs I got *and* learn various techniques and ideas in the process.

> WGS> who the *HELL* are you to tell me what is good for me. I had
>
>I never told you what was good for you. I told you that you lied.
>

Now *you* are lying. Read on.

> WGS> my own budget and went to the trouble of investing almost 
> WGS> $200 in OS/2. What was I rewarded with ? Crash protection ? 
> WGS> Yeah right. I had more crashes using OS/2 than I did using 
> WGS> Windows.  
>And you are 100% certain that you have hardware that is good enough to
>run OS/2 
[deletia]

Yes. Or is a Dell computer not 'compatible' enough ? OS/2 was obviously the
problem here.

> > WGS> I use my computer for writing papers and for 
> > WGS> programming assignments. I use remote University computers a 
> > WGS> lot. It involves a lot of Telnetting, FTPing and NFS stuff.  
>You lied. You said that TCP/IP did not exist for OS/2. It does. But instead of
      ^                            ^
      |                            |
      \----------------------------/
                   |
                   |
                   |    Who's lying now? Clearly a contradiction here.
                   |    How could I pay for something non-existent ?
                   V
> WGS> I could either cough up $150 for TCP/IP for OS/2 bringing my
> WGS> total  investment to almost $350 or could get a better
> WGS> implementation for free.  Guess which one I chose. So, OS/2
> WGS> bigot, ya better shut yer mouth. I have used TCP/IP for OS/2
> WGS> on an experimental machine in the University.  What did I
> WGS> find out ? It *sucks*. 
>
>Not all hardware is equal. OS/2 demands more than any other system you have
>mentioned. If it doesnt work on your (or the schools) system(s), then you have
>a problem. But dont go spread the word that it doesnt work on anyones hardware
>because I can prove you wrong. 
>

Stop trying to blame OS/2's crashes on hardware. Such propaganda will
only make some poor guy believe hardware is the solution. If it crashes on
a Dell computer then most likely it will crash Joe User's machine too 
when using the same software.

BTW, I'll bet Linux demands more of the hardware. It has to since it 
performs so much better and quicker than OS/2. By doing more work, it 
stresses the system more. OS/2 is a good system. It's not nearly as great 
as you think it is though. The HPFS support is a kludge.

> WGS> It seems that you have something against free software.
> WGS> Well, what can I  say if you're willing to pay for an
> WGS> *inferior* product when you can get a  *superior* product
> WGS> for free. It boggles my mind. Perhaps you have  invested too
> WGS> much in OS/2 to let go ? Tell me, did you get the base 
> WGS> package only ? 
>
>If IBM's TCP/IP is so inferior, then why are so many people in this newsgroup
>talking about how nice it is?  And as for free software... You get what you pay

Maybe they don't know better ? Maybe because they have political reasons ?
Maybe the sky will fall on our heads ? The fact is that based on my usage 
of both systems I find IBM TCP/IP to be inferior to Linux TCP/IP.

>for in most cases. There are some really nice packages out there, but then
>there are some really crappy ones too.
>

Same goes for commercial packages.

>Thats in your opinion. I paid $86 for OS/2 2.0. I later paid $88 for OS/2 2.1.
>Then I received OS/2 for Windows free from IBM. I have not had to upgrade any
>hardware in my system in order to have OS/2 work like it does, so to date, my
>total investment in OS/2 in well under $200.
>

Well, if I could get prices like yours and free software from IBM too, I 
would still stay with Linux. It works faster and does more of what I want.

>And I dont call a system that is online 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, being
>used constantly (both by me and the users of my BBS), which doesnt even get
>rebooted for weeks at a time, buggy nor inferior. I do alot of programming.
>Creating both DOS and OS/2 apps. OS/2 crash protection is AWESOME! Oh, and when

What crash protection ? We all know it's a bad joke. In theory, OS/2 can
eliminate lots of crashes. Problem is when a PM app crashes it can bring 
down the system.

>How does this differ from DOS or Windows? Linux is not something I can walk
>into a store and order, nor can I get it when I order my new system. Besides,
>none of the stuff I run would run as fast as it does with OS/2. I have a friend
>that has a Linux box setup. From what he has told me about the DOS emulation, I
>would loose about 50% of my productivity under Linux. I dont need that.
>

That's the OS/2 anachronism. Buy a new improved OS to run apps that depend
on an old phucked OS. Run DOS under OS/2. Never will you be free of it.
If the software were free in the first place and with source, it would
have been native by now.

Yeah. I, for one, want to be DOS free. DOOM and the occasional paper keep me
from doing away with it altogether. I want to run programs that take full 
advantage of my machine and are not hobbled by an ancient OS. That's why 
I'm getting rid of DOS as soon as I save up enough to get WordPerfect for X.

You can order Linux on CD-ROM or on floppies. You can download it 
yourself. You can FTP it. You can NFS it.

> WGS> In fact, after using Linux for almost a year and a half, I
> WGS> have  encountered exactly *one* bug. Only once did Linux
> WGS> crash. But you *paid*  for an operating system that is
> WGS> bug-infested, huh ? I guess you're a  pretty smart guy - you
> WGS> think I'm cheap when I'm getting a better deal.  I'll be
> WGS> laughing all the way to the bank.
>
>The bugs I have run into with OS/2 were bugs I could live with. They did not
>stop me from running any programs I wanted to run, and in fact have all be
>cosmetic bugs. And each release of OS/2 has gotten better and better.
>

The one bug I run into has long since disappeared. Unlike you I don't 
have to live with bugs. I just haven't encountered others and I hope it 
stays that way. 

Each release of Linux also gets better and better. Not every year as with 
OS/2 but every two weeks or so.

>Plus, perhaps you have seen some of the files IBM releases routinely, which fix
>some of the bugs that do manage to get into a new release? Show me any other
>company that does this? MS sure doesnt!
>

The Linux developers do it. I couldn't give two hoots about MS support. I 
don't use any of their operating systems though I'll give Chicago a shot.
The bugs I encountered with OS/2 2.1 soon after it was released remained 
unfixed and at large until the release of the Service Pak. Routine 
updates ? Sure.

> WGS> So what if I wanted free software ? Let's see here. If
> WGS> someone developed  a clone of Word for Windows 6.0 or
> WGS> whatever WP you use and made it freely  available with
> WGS> source are you saying you would pay for the MS article ?  If
> WGS> you do, you're a candidate for the Nobel prize in Stupidity.
>
>I no longer buy MS crap. I paid for too many bug fixes over the years, and I no
>longer subscribe to the MS mentality of "ship a buggy product, and then we can
>get them suckers to pay for the fixes".
>

So if it helps you change MS and Word for Windows to your favorite 
package from your favorite company. Nice try at evading the question though.

> WGS> However, if you want to pay for *inferior* stuff, more power
> WGS> to you. I  have a bug-ridden copy of OS/2 2.1 I do not want.
> WGS> Care to buy it ? I'm  selling DOS and Windows too.
>
>I have OS/2 (both full version and the For Windows version) already sitting
>here. I dont think I need that. And I have also sold my DOS and Windows
>packages as well. I dont intend to ever give MS another dime.
>

Ah, smarting about MS huh ? Be thankful for how far they brought the 
lowest common denominator. I think they'll be getting lots of your dimes 
in a couple of years. They make the best apps. Oh, I forgot, you don't 
mind using inferior products.

> WGS> Don't forget, I have installed *and* used OS/2 for a good
> WGS> length of time.  I have also installed and used Linux for a
> WGS> longer time. From my  experience, Linux is better. Perhaps
> WGS> you went off half cocked, huh ? Tell  me, have you used
> WGS> Linux in any significant way ? 
>
>I have no intention of running an OS that you cant even understand the CLI
>commands for. LS means what? DIR makes alot more sense. And all Unix variations

In what way does DIR make more sense ? In that you're used to using it ? 
Why should a group of files be called a directory ? LS is short for LiSt.

>have the same problem. I can at least understand the CP/M, DOS and OS/2 command
>lines. The command names make sense. Unix (including Linux) do not. Find makes
>sense. Grep does not. Although I do use grep on this OS/2 box.
>

No command line makes sense. All of them have their problems. When 
you become proficient at using them, you reap their benefits. The OS/2 
command line processor is very weak. No two ways about that. If you talk 
about command lines, Unix is king of the hill. It evolved around the 
command line. CP/M and DOS borrowed from it.

>I have used command lines of one kind or another since 1974. Unix makes the
>least amount of sense of any of them, and nothing else even comes close. None
>are perfect, which I believe is part of the reason GUI's are so popular
>nowdays. I havent played with X-Windows yet, but I will soon. I may give me a
>way to use Unix without having to deal with all those unexplainable command
>names.
>

Your problem is that you don't know how to use Unix. It's not difficult. 
The only problem is you're used to DOS and the DOS way of thinking about 
command lines.

>Anyways, back to where this all started. You lied. Blatantly. Anyone reading
>you post would have assumed that TCP/IP for OS/2 simply didnt exist. It does.
>But even though you now admit that you knew this, you completely failed to
>mention it. That is a lie!
>

All you've shown with this is you are the real liar here. Shock tactics 
for advocating OS/2 ? Discredit any naysayers and hound them. 

You should be a lawyer or politician. On second thoughts, don't, you 
won't get far.

>Mark Woolworth [Team OS/2]



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

From: bwelling@wam.umd.edu (Brian Wellington)
Subject: Re: S3 Support - A bit lacking?
Date: 24 Jun 1994 03:21:19 GMT

In article <2u6b9h$bke@serveur.cribx1.u-bordeaux.fr>,
Niedner <niedner@petrus.cribx1.u-bordeaux.fr> wrote:
>Brian Wellington (bwelling@wam.umd.edu) wrote:
>
>: >Could you share what you did, as my couple of hours playing with the
>: >VGA clock registers failed to get me anthing other than standard VGA
>: >with my S3 based Spea/V7 Mirage. I only have 40 Mbytes for Linux, so
>: >rebuilding anything large may be a bit of a problem.
>
>: I have an Orchid Fahrenheit 1280 Plus/VLB, and was able to get 132x43 by
>: editing setup.S, only changing the string searched for in BIOS, it's
>: length and location (got those from DOSEMU getrom), and modified the
>: Orchid Fahrenheit 1280 values.  It works in text mode, and is fine with
>: X, but svgalib programs don't work (the screen has a bunch of black
>: vertical columns, and dosemu really screws up when it's quit, and there's
>: no way to fix it.   Any ideas?
>
>: Brian
>
>So, well, unfotunately - as a newbie - i wasn't able to learn anything from
>your words... they seem to be mysetrious to me. But: i do have the same
>problem (17" Monitor, S3 Board (miro 8s)). So please, please, could you
>post a more _precise_ description of what you did, and perhaps add some 
>hints what to change for other graphic boards ... I think anyone involved 
>in this thread would be thankful.
>
>Thanks a lot in advance, Sven
>

If you have dosemu, use getrom to dump video bios to a file.
Find the text string identifying the card, its offset in the file, and
its length.  In /usr/src/linux/boot/setup.S, substitute these values for
that of another card (such as a #9 GXE or Orchid Fahrenheit).  The code
is commented, but remember to convert the values to hex.  The video modes
must be added to the list near the bottom of the file, as do the 
resolutions (this is also commented).  Then recompile the kernel and tell lilo
to ask for a video mode, and it should work.

Good luck...
Brian


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


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