Actually, shoes are quite usable without socks. For instance, people often wear sandals w/o socks. Many distance runners run without socks.
This is closer to "A house is better than a foundation." Yes, most houses do require cement or some such foundation (where the X server would be the foundation), but some homes can be used w/o that foundation, though they do not stand up nearly as well (a mobile home for instance, which could be compared to running a qt-based program under windows).
Seems text mode doesn't preserve tabs. Well, everything past "X clients" should be a subcatagory of it, not on the same level.
Anyway, the html version of LUNA's X explanation (written by Jeff Gehlbach, creater of the gnu utils "--dammit" patch) is available at http://luna.huntsville.al.us/faq/faq-3.html#ss3.3 for a quick link.
For those not very familar with the X Windowing System (the linux user group of north alabama has a good writeup by the way, drop by http://luna.huntsville.al.us/faq and go to the X section), a quick briefing of what makes up X: - X server: talks to graphics system, keyboard, mouse, etc - X clients: all other programs that talk and request resources from the X server - toolkits: scroll bars, text input, all sorts of things like this. GTK, QT, and motif are examples - window managers: let the user manipulate the windows present on his display. TWM, FVWM, WindowMaker, Enlightenment, KWM, etc. (KWM is KDEs window manager)
Up until a few years ago, open source "deskop enviroments" weren't really available (GNOME and KDE are opensource examples). These enviroments often use a toolkit, consistent ui guideliness, and have methods of letting apps talk to eachother easily. They also sometimes include window managers (KDE uses KWM, and recently others can be used as well; GNOME has always sought to be "window manager independent," meaning that if you have a supported wm, you get extra features. If not, you just don't have the extra features.
Hope that clears a few things up! cfrost@hiwaay.net (my domain is currently down...)
Does anyone know if there will ever be an Irix binary for any of the stable releases? There are nightly builds, but I have never seen a binary of a stable release.
Is it possible to take the source to a recent milestone (or even daily build) and compile it against glibc2.0? I'd love to try mozilla out, as it's been a while, but am only running glibc2.0, not 2.1, for the time being.
Is it possible to take the source to a recent milestone (or even daily build) and compile it against glibc2.0? I'd love to try mozilla out, as it's been a while, but am only running glibc2.0, not 2.1, for the time being. Thanks, Chris
Actually, Aladdin has been nice enough for some time to rerelease an versions of over a year in age under GPL. So, you can grab Aladdin's current GS under their license, or the GPL'd version.
Actually, tcp/ip over ax.25 (ham radio data) is great; the 44.0.0.0/24 range is reserved only for amateur radio networks!
As soon as I have enough money, I'll be buying a second tnc (terminal mode controller, more or less a modem, with packet "stuff" added on), to connect to my handheld 2m/70cm radio, and my newton, so that I can do wireless internet from my hand (and much cheaper than a cellphone after a few months).
There are several great places to begin seeing what packet radio is all about, if anyone's interested you might drop by http://www.frostnet.advicom.net/chris/bookmarks/Ha m_Radio/ and take a look at the listed sites.
I often see people comparing ultra66 ide devices to ultrawide or u2 devices, and say "Look, the ide drive goes at 66MB/s, whereas the expensive scsi disk only goes 40MB/s" (or 80 as the case may be).
This is almost completely wrong! These speeds are for the device interface, the speed at which data can be moved on the chain. The speed of the actual drive is independent of this! Most current ide drives have around a 6--10 MB/s sustained transfer rate. Nicer scsi drives are in the vicinity of 20+ MB/s. Also note, that for these speeds, your cpu for ide is having to work very hard, whereas with scsi it may not even be doing any work.
So, if you can only have two ide devices per chain, that means maybe 20MB/s transfer rate. Further, ide is single-tasking: when you do a request to a device, all other devices on the chain must sit and wait for the other device to find what it needs, read it, and send it back. SCSI is multithreaded: you say "hey, give me data", while grabbing data from two other drives, a fibrechannel array, send data to your 8x dvd writer, do ip-over-scsi, and receive the data you just requested!
Lastly, since scsi drives are often targetted at higher-end markets, they tend to be of higher quality than their ide counterparts.
And, finally, a (/very/) brief example: Burning CDs on my box to my scsi cd writer from an ide drive pegs me around a load of two or three! The machine (a dual 166 pentium) is barely able to respond to mouse events. Doing the same task, but with the data coming from an/older/ scsi drive doesn't even affect my load average, it still hovers around 0.01 or so! Granted, cd writing is only one specific example, but it is still an example.
Don't get me wrong, ide drives definately have their places, but for large work loads they come nowhere near scsi drives and arrays or fibrechannel drives (which haven't started to really crop up yet).
XFree86 4.0 will support 8bit overlays; the pre-4.0 series is already out with pseudo-monthly releases and "the real thing" should be out very late this year/earlier next year.
EROS (http://www.eros-os.org/) has some very interesting ideas built into it (it's the work of a Jonathan Shapiro at U Penn for his phd, utilizing many concepts of the KeyKOS). Things such as it's pure capability architecture, orthogonal global persistence, "stateless" supervisor, deadlock-free supervisor, and a few others are very interesting. The OS itself has been released under a modified MPL (runs on x86 for now) btw. There has some brief talking of taking advantage of some of its features long-term on linux-kernel too.
Re:Is there any reason to stay with the 2.0.x seri
on
Linux 2.0.37 Released
·
· Score: 3
Well, I know of at least one actually. 2.2 was designed with the notion that everyone has at least 16megs of ram (or at least everyone that will want to upgrade), so there are all sorts of optimizations and such which make 2.2 slower on machines with around 16megs or less of ram (certain cases being exceptions of course). Not that this is bad, we shouldn't hold linux back so that we can always run it on a two meg 386 without a math coprocessor, we just have to be careful to not assume to high of a hardware configuration. I'm still running 2.0.36 on a 486 with 16megs of ram (100mhz fwiw) and it runs a bit faster than with 2.2, so it's staying with 2.0 unless something terible is found which can't really be fixed.
So, yes, there are technical reasons out there to stay with 2.0.
Hope that helped, Chris Frost
Re:OK, but the Debian/GNU "web" logo rules
on
Debian Chooses Logo
·
· Score: 1
> I've seen it somewhere, a picture of a little penguin looking up at a gnu. Very cool.
Yes, it comes with the apache deb still (just look the servers base page). I'd post a link to a copy somewhere still on my website . . . but it might kill my little box;) So, if you'd like to see the logo, install debian on a box of yours!
Where can you download iso images of bsd's? (I know for certain I haven't found any for OpenBSD.) I have seen several places with RH images (and even more with debian images), as well as the posting of the actual command(s) used to generate the images for debian. Would you share the url for any of the bsd os's cd images?
Linux on 32bit based systems can handle 2gig files at max (not filesystems!; they can be *much* larger). The reason linux does not wish to up the file size and and ram support is that it would take some non-pretty hacking.
Now, don't think x86 is the only 32bit arch out there, Sparcs are 32bit as well, and these systems will be around for some time, with boxes such as SS10 and 20's which can keep chugging along even under huge loads.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, shoes are quite usable without socks.
For instance, people often wear sandals w/o socks. Many distance runners run without socks.
This is closer to "A house is better than a foundation." Yes, most houses do require cement or some such foundation (where the X server would be the foundation), but some homes can be used w/o that foundation, though they do not stand up nearly as well (a mobile home for instance, which could be compared to running a qt-based program under windows).
Seems text mode doesn't preserve tabs.
Well, everything past "X clients" should be a subcatagory of it, not on the same level.
Anyway, the html version of LUNA's X explanation (written by Jeff Gehlbach, creater of the gnu utils "--dammit" patch) is available at http://luna.huntsville.al.us/faq/faq-3.html#ss3.3 for a quick link.
cfrost@hiwaay.net
Oh yes, kde smokes xfree...
For those not very familar with the X Windowing System (the linux user group of north alabama has a good writeup by the way, drop by http://luna.huntsville.al.us/faq and go to the X section), a quick briefing of what makes up X:
- X server: talks to graphics system, keyboard, mouse, etc
- X clients: all other programs that talk and request resources from the X server
- toolkits: scroll bars, text input, all sorts of things like this. GTK, QT, and motif are examples
- window managers: let the user manipulate the windows present on his display. TWM, FVWM, WindowMaker, Enlightenment, KWM, etc. (KWM is KDEs window manager)
Up until a few years ago, open source "deskop enviroments" weren't really available (GNOME and KDE are opensource examples). These enviroments often use a toolkit, consistent ui guideliness, and have methods of letting apps talk to eachother easily. They also sometimes include window managers (KDE uses KWM, and recently others can be used as well; GNOME has always sought to be "window manager independent," meaning that if you have a supported wm, you get extra features. If not, you just don't have the extra features.
Hope that clears a few things up!
cfrost@hiwaay.net (my domain is currently down...)
Hopefully some[one|people] will have a chance to port quakeworld to irix now . . .
Of course, what I'd really like is a release of Q3 for Irix, but you can't be picky.
Does anyone know if there will ever be an Irix binary for any of the stable releases? There are nightly builds, but I have never seen a binary of a stable release.
Thanks,
Chris
Sorry about that, wrong story (just goes to show you having too many windows open at once can be a probem...).
Is it possible to take the source to a recent milestone (or even daily build) and compile it against glibc2.0? I'd love to try mozilla out, as it's been a while, but am only running glibc2.0, not 2.1, for the time being.
Thanks,
Chris
Is it possible to take the source to a recent milestone (or even daily build) and compile it against glibc2.0? I'd love to try mozilla out, as it's been a while, but am only running glibc2.0, not 2.1, for the time being. Thanks, Chris
All recent mozilla builds are against glibc2.1; is it possible to download the source for a build it and compile against glibc2.0?
thanks,
Chris
Actually, Aladdin has been nice enough for some time to rerelease an versions of over a year in age under GPL. So, you can grab Aladdin's current GS under their license, or the GPL'd version.
Actually, tcp/ip over ax.25 (ham radio data) is great; the 44.0.0.0/24 range is reserved only for amateur radio networks!
a m_Radio/ and take a look at the listed sites.
As soon as I have enough money, I'll be buying a second tnc (terminal mode controller, more or less a modem, with packet "stuff" added on), to connect to my handheld 2m/70cm radio, and my newton, so that I can do wireless internet from my hand (and much cheaper than a cellphone after a few months).
There are several great places to begin seeing what packet radio is all about, if anyone's interested you might drop by http://www.frostnet.advicom.net/chris/bookmarks/H
I often see people comparing ultra66 ide devices to ultrawide or u2 devices, and say "Look, the ide drive goes at 66MB/s, whereas the expensive scsi disk only goes 40MB/s" (or 80 as the case may be).
/older/ scsi drive doesn't even affect my load average, it still hovers around 0.01 or so! Granted, cd writing is only one specific example, but it is still an example.
This is almost completely wrong! These speeds are for the device interface, the speed at which data can be moved on the chain. The speed of the actual drive is independent of this! Most current ide drives have around a 6--10 MB/s sustained transfer rate. Nicer scsi drives are in the vicinity of 20+ MB/s. Also note, that for these speeds, your cpu for ide is having to work very hard, whereas with scsi it may not even be doing any work.
So, if you can only have two ide devices per chain, that means maybe 20MB/s transfer rate. Further, ide is single-tasking: when you do a request to a device, all other devices on the chain must sit and wait for the other device to find what it needs, read it, and send it back. SCSI is multithreaded: you say "hey, give me data", while grabbing data from two other drives, a fibrechannel array, send data to your 8x dvd writer, do ip-over-scsi, and receive the data you just requested!
Lastly, since scsi drives are often targetted at higher-end markets, they tend to be of higher quality than their ide counterparts.
And, finally, a (/very/) brief example:
Burning CDs on my box to my scsi cd writer from an ide drive pegs me around a load of two or three! The machine (a dual 166 pentium) is barely able to respond to mouse events. Doing the same task, but with the data coming from an
Don't get me wrong, ide drives definately have their places, but for large work loads they come nowhere near scsi drives and arrays or fibrechannel drives (which haven't started to really crop up yet).
Just my thoughts on the subject (hope they help).
XFree86 4.0 will support 8bit overlays; the pre-4.0 series is already out with pseudo-monthly releases and "the real thing" should be out very late this year/earlier next year.
EROS (http://www.eros-os.org/) has some very interesting ideas built into it (it's the work of a Jonathan Shapiro at U Penn for his phd, utilizing many concepts of the KeyKOS). Things such as it's pure capability architecture, orthogonal global persistence, "stateless" supervisor, deadlock-free supervisor, and a few others are very interesting. The OS itself has been released under a modified MPL (runs on x86 for now) btw. There has some brief talking of taking advantage of some of its features long-term on linux-kernel too.
Well, I know of at least one actually. 2.2 was designed with the notion that everyone has at least 16megs of ram (or at least everyone that will want to upgrade), so there are all sorts of optimizations and such which make 2.2 slower on machines with around 16megs or less of ram (certain cases being exceptions of course). Not that this is bad, we shouldn't hold linux back so that we can always run it on a two meg 386 without a math coprocessor, we just have to be careful to not assume to high of a hardware configuration. I'm still running 2.0.36 on a 486 with 16megs of ram (100mhz fwiw) and it runs a bit faster than with 2.2, so it's staying with 2.0 unless something terible is found which can't really be fixed.
So, yes, there are technical reasons out there to stay with 2.0.
Hope that helped,
Chris Frost
> I've seen it somewhere, a picture of a little penguin looking up at a gnu. Very cool.
;) So, if you'd like to see the logo, install debian on a box of yours!
Yes, it comes with the apache deb still (just look the servers base page). I'd post a link to a copy somewhere still on my website . . . but it might kill my little box
Where can you download iso images of bsd's? (I know for certain I haven't found any for OpenBSD.) I have seen several places with RH images (and even more with debian images), as well as the posting of the actual command(s) used to generate the images for debian. Would you share the url for any of the bsd os's cd images?
Just so that no one thinks I was crazy when pasing the info on to /.: I posted this [late] yesterday, noticing that it "had" been released today. :)
Everyone interested, go by and buy a cd!
Seems a few people are confused here...
Linux on 32bit based systems can handle 2gig files at max (not filesystems!; they can be *much* larger). The reason linux does not wish to up the file size and and ram support is that it would take some non-pretty hacking.
Now, don't think x86 is the only 32bit arch out there, Sparcs are 32bit as well, and these systems will be around for some time, with boxes such as SS10 and 20's which can keep chugging along even under huge loads.
I regularly have 5-20 browsers open at a time, what are you talking about?
I do so because with a modem, bandwidth is fairly small, so I download pages while I'm reading others.