I'm familiar with Java, but haven't really followed C#/.NET stuff, so here's another dumb question: Is this Mono compiler a bytecode compiler like javac (which still requires a JVM for further JIT compilation) or is it a native compiler like GCJ which compiles down to an executable?
and x11 didn't show as one of the available video output drivers when I did "mplayer -vo help". But it might have more to do with having framebuffer support... see my post above.
You also already have framebuffer support in your kernel I'm assuming
Aha! That's what I was afraid of, since I'm not all that familiar with kernel configuration. As I said, this is a fairly stock RH install, with the stock kernel that 7.2 comes with.
In a nutshell, what do I need to do to check if I have framebuffer support in my kernel, and what do I need to do to put it there if I don't? Does it require a full kernel compile, or just inserting a few module lines in/etc/rc.local? (Yes I know, RTFM!)
Much appreciated, but I tried: mplayer -vo xv test.mpg and I get:
MPlayer 0.50 (C) 2000-2001 Arpad Gereoffy (see DOCS!)
Reading/root/.mplayer/codecs.conf: 18 audio & 40 video codecs
font: can't open file:/root/.mplayer/font/font.desc
font: can't open file:/usr/local/share/mplayer/font/font.desc
Playing test.mpg
Invalid video output driver name: xv
Use '-vo help' to get a list of available video drivers.
(are those font files the culprit? Do I really need them if I don't have vids with subtitles?)
so i tried: mplayer -vo help and get:
MPlayer 0.50 (C) 2000-2001 Arpad Gereoffy (see DOCS!)
Available video output drivers:
fbdev Framebuffer Device
null Null video output
odivx OpenDivX AVI File writer
pgm PGM file
md5 MD5 sum
mpegpes Mpeg-PES file
so I tried: mplayer -vo fbdev test.mpg
but still get: "fbdev: Can't open/dev/fb0: No such device" as before.
To the guys in this thread who have mplayer running... I downloaded and compiled.50 a while back and it compiled just fine with the gcc 3.0.1 on my RH7.2 box. (I also installed the supporting files in my home directory as the instructions say). However, when I tried to run it with a test mpeg file from the command line, the output seems to indicate that it's detecting the codec just fine, but look at the last 2 lines:
$ mplayer test.mpg
(about 11 lines of output snipped)
Detected video codec: [mpeg12] drv:1 (MPEG 1 or 2)
fbdev: Can't open/dev/fb0: No such device
Sorry, selected video_out device is incompatible with this codec.
I would suppose this has something to do with the framebuffer? What do I need to do to get this going on a fairly stock RH install? Thanks.
What kind of shell does this "console" for Darwin/BSD have? Does it come with bash? Does it come with many of the standard Unix tools like top, vi, etc... Does the directory structure look fairly close to Unix? Do the Mac user apps really go into/usr like we're used to?
And this toolkit on the extra CD... is that the Cocoa tools? Is it somewhat comparable to how Qt/GTK is worked with?
Is almost seems like OSX is "open" at the Darwin/BSD level, but the "closed/restricted" part is the GUI level above. You can work with the Cocoa tools to build apps, but unlike Qt/GTK, you can never have open access to much of what's going on in the UI layer. Does that seem about a fair description?
IBM's support of Linux has been great, and I realize they've said they won't do their own distro, but I STILL say they should! They could probably buy RedHat outright, which already seems to have close ties to IBM at RTP.
An IBM Linux distro would become sorta like the "IBM PC" in that it would be a quasi-standard that everyone rallies around, but IBM doesn't really control. This already happened with the PC. The GPL would ensure it further. (IBM's hardware-centricity would also help ensure impartiality for software) In other words, it would create a sort of "majority-defacto" Linux API that developers could at least shoot for instead of the current bit of fragmentation. A (relatively) standard API has worked to M$ advantage for attracting developers.
IBM's good name would help Linux acceptance with the PHB's:) This already happened with IBM's name on small PC's which were seen as curiosities by management types when they first appeared years ago. Linux is in a similar place that the small computers like Apple and RadioShack were in then. Once you get this kind of corporate and overall acceptance, the momentum builds, more folks get involved, and things get even better.
I'm not totally up on all the news with Galeon (I tried it for a while about a year ago) but I recall that rpm binary installs also required a full Mozilla install because there was some issue about the Gecko libraries. IIRC, apparently at the time the licensing issue was resolved and there was talk that binary rpms would be available with just the needed Gecko libraries included. However, a year later it looks like the full Mozilla is still needed for Galeon. Not a flame, I'm just curious why... is there still a licensing issue where the key Gecko components can't be distributed separately with a Galeon rpm binary?
(otherwise... Kudos to the Galeon team for the great work!)
Also a little OT: Java SWT
on
GTK-- vs. QT
·
· Score: 1, Offtopic
Something to keep in mind even though it's still in it's very early stages... IBM is behind a new Java API for GUI's called SWT (Standard widget toolkit). In a nutshell, it's sort of a combo of AWT and Swing. It uses mostly native widgets (like AWT) for better performance, memory footprint, and native L&F... but also makes use of emulated widgets (like Swing) for the occasions when a particular peered component may not exist on a given platform.
More info on SWT can be found at the Eclipse website as well as a good intro article here. Right now it supports Win32 MFC as well as (somewhat ugly) Motif for Linux, but Qt and GTK ports are being worked on. As always with Java, portability is a strong consideration, and the hope is that an app written with SWT will work on a wide variety of platforms and native toolkits.
Why does Galeon still req full Mozilla install?
on
Mozilla 0.9.6 Released
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I use Mozilla with KDE, and haven't used Gnome for nearly a year. At the time Galeon required you to have a full Mozilla install - this was because of the licensing of some of the main Gecko components. Supposedly the licensing was changed, and word was that Galeon would no longer require a full Mozilla install because it could just ship with the few Gecko components it needed. However, I notice on the Galeon site it still requires a full Mozilla install - was the component license issue never resolved? What's up? (not a flame, just curious)
A few weeks back, a friend tried to access his Hotmail account while I had Linux/Mozilla.9.4 booted on my PC, and it wouldn't work then either. (Had to reboot to the Windows partition)
I just said this yesterday in the "Microsoft Gatekeeper" thread! Especially now that MS is so agressively going after AOL's lunch with all their Passport stuff, I hope AOL would get the clue that having their signup logo as an icon on the Windows desktop is of little help if they are reliant upon IE (which MS will always use to their advantage)
AOL needs to bundle the Netscape browser (which they own) with AOL 7.0.
Especially now that MS is so agressively going after AOL's lunch, I hope AOL would get the clue that having their signup logo as an icon on the Windows desktop is of little help if they are reliant upon IE (which MS will always use to their advantage)
AOL needs to bundle the Netscape browser (which they own) with AOL 7.0.
Why does everyone think that all things Java MUST be interpreted? A suite of Java desktop apps could be natively compiled using something like TowerJ or GCJ along with the JRE installed as the static library. The speed and memory use would be very similar to C/C++ native apps.
(Yea, I realize interpreted code can be JIT compiled for speed, but the start-up time is annoying)
Swing is a very good GUI toolkit, and it's surprising that a desktop based on Swing hasn't been started similar to Gnome/Gtk and KDE/Qt. All the effort that Sun is putting into Gnome is work that COULD HAVE gone in to a Swing-based desktop.
(And I wish Sun would give up on this interpreted stuff and create a good native compiler for Java/Swing like what GCC is trying to do)
For anyone who doesn't know, KDE also has the option of a Mac-like global menu bar running along the top (changing context as focus changes) instead of the common style of inside individual windows.
Of course, one problem is that you still need to have the taskbar to get the K-button menu, but work is being done to have the K-button in the Mac-like global menu so that it works similar to the "Apple-logo" button.
http://mosfet.org/macmenu2.jpg
So how would IBM do an AIX-Linux switch?
on
IBM Wants Linux
·
· Score: 1
(2nd try- registration didn't work the first time and it went it as AC)
I made a post on Friday in the "purple book" thread (see my user info) that I still think that IBM should do their own Linux distro (or buy an existing one) for the same reasons as why the IBM PC was more quickly adopted by "corporate suits" than the other PC's at the time which they viewed as hobbyist toys (seeing the similarity to today as most "suits" view Linux this way). The Steve Mills quote was mentioned in the responses.
So how would this AIX->Linux switch happen?
1. IBM buys an established distro like RH or Suse, then GPL's the AIX tools, then rebuilds the distro to include those tools?
or
2. IBM GPL's the AIX tools, then rebuilds AIX around the Linux kernel, and calls it something like "AIX Open"? (which would essentially be IBM's Linux distro)
Yes, I realize IBM has said that they won't do their own distro... but I still think they should.
One of the biggest reasons for the success of the PC was not just the openess, but because the IBM brand name was something that provided a bit more confidence for "the corporate suits" to adopt... an image which Apple and Radio Shack didn't quite have then... and most distros don't quite have right now.
IBM should probably buy an existing distro like Redhat in addition to the multi-distro support they're already doing. Thanks to the GPL, all of their developments for their own distro will still be available to other distros who will in turn refine IBM's developments, and so on.
I've always liked the context-sensitive global menu at the top of the Mac screen instead of having them be a part of the individual windows like MS does.
Apple UI studies found that it's easier to just throw the mouse to the top instead of aiming for the menu in a window. Apparently (rumor) MS would have also done one global menu at the top like Mac were it not for Apple patent issues? Does anyone know if that's true?
Otherwise, KDE does allow a Mac-like global menu in it's theme preferences, but it's more of an afterthought. If Apple patent issues can be avoided, perhaps Gnome should default to a singular Mac-like global menu at the top? (menus in windows would still be available as an option)
The syntax for blocking pop-up windows has changed since Mozilla 0.9. To block pop-up windows, add this line to the prefs.js file in your Mozilla profile directory while Mozilla is not running:
I've seen speculation that AOL was holding back on the Mozilla/Netscape browser for not wanting to make it look like IE *didn't* have a monopoly. Now what?
Apparently MS and AOL are also going back and forth on dealings for whether AOL will get an icon on the Win desktop or just bundle the Netscape browser with the next version of AOL. What about that now?
I'm running RH 7.1 (w Gnome) with the M$ TT fonts imported and used with Xfree.
Mozilla displays pages with the TT fonts just fine, but they don't seem to look right with Galeon. It looks as if Galeon is still using the old Adobe fonts and not the M$ TTFs... or simply not doing the TTFs right. (Yes, I've set the preferences correctly, and adjusted the font size spinner... but no luck)
MDI is just a sloppy bandaid for not putting the menu bar at the top of the screen the way the Mac did it
Yea, but the reality is that Gnome or KDE don't have the menu bar across the top of the screen like a Mac, so you get the worst possible menu - neither across the top (like Mac) or at the top of a root window (like the Win version of PS). An MDI version of GIMP would be nice!
I'm used to using Photoshop on Windows where everything is within a root window and the images are in multiple windows within that root window (thus, MDI - multiple doc interface)
GIMP on Linux uses SDI (single doc interface) which, like the Mac version of Photshop, puts everything on the desktop instead of a root window. (Though some consider the desktop to be a root window in itself - I mean an app root window here)
Is there anyway to have GIMP work in MDI on Linux like Photoshop in Windows? A plugin or something? It's just a personal preference of mine, that's all.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm familiar with Java, but haven't really followed C#/.NET stuff, so here's another dumb question: Is this Mono compiler a bytecode compiler like javac (which still requires a JVM for further JIT compilation) or is it a native compiler like GCJ which compiles down to an executable?
Thanks, but trying these gave:
Invalid video output driver name: x11
and x11 didn't show as one of the available video output drivers when I did "mplayer -vo help". But it might have more to do with having framebuffer support... see my post above.
You also already have framebuffer support in your kernel I'm assuming
/etc/rc.local? (Yes I know, RTFM!)
Aha! That's what I was afraid of, since I'm not all that familiar with kernel configuration. As I said, this is a fairly stock RH install, with the stock kernel that 7.2 comes with.
In a nutshell, what do I need to do to check if I have framebuffer support in my kernel, and what do I need to do to put it there if I don't? Does it require a full kernel compile, or just inserting a few module lines in
Much appreciated, but I tried: mplayer -vo xv test.mpg and I get:
/root/.mplayer/codecs.conf: 18 audio & 40 video codecs
/root/.mplayer/font/font.desc
/usr/local/share/mplayer/font/font.desc
/dev/fb0: No such device" as before.
MPlayer 0.50 (C) 2000-2001 Arpad Gereoffy (see DOCS!)
Reading
font: can't open file:
font: can't open file:
Playing test.mpg
Invalid video output driver name: xv
Use '-vo help' to get a list of available video drivers.
(are those font files the culprit? Do I really need them if I don't have vids with subtitles?)
so i tried: mplayer -vo help and get:
MPlayer 0.50 (C) 2000-2001 Arpad Gereoffy (see DOCS!)
Available video output drivers:
fbdev Framebuffer Device
null Null video output
odivx OpenDivX AVI File writer
pgm PGM file
md5 MD5 sum
mpegpes Mpeg-PES file
so I tried: mplayer -vo fbdev test.mpg
but still get: "fbdev: Can't open
Any suggestions?
To the guys in this thread who have mplayer running... I downloaded and compiled .50 a while back and it compiled just fine with the gcc 3.0.1 on my RH7.2 box. (I also installed the supporting files in my home directory as the instructions say). However, when I tried to run it with a test mpeg file from the command line, the output seems to indicate that it's detecting the codec just fine, but look at the last 2 lines:
/dev/fb0: No such device
$ mplayer test.mpg
(about 11 lines of output snipped)
Detected video codec: [mpeg12] drv:1 (MPEG 1 or 2)
fbdev: Can't open
Sorry, selected video_out device is incompatible with this codec.
I would suppose this has something to do with the framebuffer? What do I need to do to get this going on a fairly stock RH install? Thanks.
I don't know much about OSX. If I could ask...
/usr like we're used to?
What kind of shell does this "console" for Darwin/BSD have? Does it come with bash? Does it come with many of the standard Unix tools like top, vi, etc... Does the directory structure look fairly close to Unix? Do the Mac user apps really go into
And this toolkit on the extra CD... is that the Cocoa tools? Is it somewhat comparable to how Qt/GTK is worked with?
Is almost seems like OSX is "open" at the Darwin/BSD level, but the "closed/restricted" part is the GUI level above. You can work with the Cocoa tools to build apps, but unlike Qt/GTK, you can never have open access to much of what's going on in the UI layer. Does that seem about a fair description?
Redhat
Java
KDE
Can anyone think of anymore?
IBM's support of Linux has been great, and I realize they've said they won't do their own distro, but I STILL say they should! They could probably buy RedHat outright, which already seems to have close ties to IBM at RTP.
:) This already happened with IBM's name on small PC's which were seen as curiosities by management types when they first appeared years ago. Linux is in a similar place that the small computers like Apple and RadioShack were in then. Once you get this kind of corporate and overall acceptance, the momentum builds, more folks get involved, and things get even better.
An IBM Linux distro would become sorta like the "IBM PC" in that it would be a quasi-standard that everyone rallies around, but IBM doesn't really control. This already happened with the PC. The GPL would ensure it further. (IBM's hardware-centricity would also help ensure impartiality for software) In other words, it would create a sort of "majority-defacto" Linux API that developers could at least shoot for instead of the current bit of fragmentation. A (relatively) standard API has worked to M$ advantage for attracting developers.
IBM's good name would help Linux acceptance with the PHB's
I'm not totally up on all the news with Galeon (I tried it for a while about a year ago) but I recall that rpm binary installs also required a full Mozilla install because there was some issue about the Gecko libraries. IIRC, apparently at the time the licensing issue was resolved and there was talk that binary rpms would be available with just the needed Gecko libraries included. However, a year later it looks like the full Mozilla is still needed for Galeon. Not a flame, I'm just curious why... is there still a licensing issue where the key Gecko components can't be distributed separately with a Galeon rpm binary?
(otherwise... Kudos to the Galeon team for the great work!)
Something to keep in mind even though it's still in it's very early stages... IBM is behind a new Java API for GUI's called SWT (Standard widget toolkit). In a nutshell, it's sort of a combo of AWT and Swing. It uses mostly native widgets (like AWT) for better performance, memory footprint, and native L&F... but also makes use of emulated widgets (like Swing) for the occasions when a particular peered component may not exist on a given platform.
More info on SWT can be found at the Eclipse website as well as a good intro article here. Right now it supports Win32 MFC as well as (somewhat ugly) Motif for Linux, but Qt and GTK ports are being worked on. As always with Java, portability is a strong consideration, and the hope is that an app written with SWT will work on a wide variety of platforms and native toolkits.
I use Mozilla with KDE, and haven't used Gnome for nearly a year. At the time Galeon required you to have a full Mozilla install - this was because of the licensing of some of the main Gecko components. Supposedly the licensing was changed, and word was that Galeon would no longer require a full Mozilla install because it could just ship with the few Gecko components it needed. However, I notice on the Galeon site it still requires a full Mozilla install - was the component license issue never resolved? What's up? (not a flame, just curious)
A few weeks back, a friend tried to access his Hotmail account while I had Linux/Mozilla .9.4 booted on my PC, and it wouldn't work then either. (Had to reboot to the Windows partition)
I just said this yesterday in the "Microsoft Gatekeeper" thread! Especially now that MS is so agressively going after AOL's lunch with all their Passport stuff, I hope AOL would get the clue that having their signup logo as an icon on the Windows desktop is of little help if they are reliant upon IE (which MS will always use to their advantage)
AOL needs to bundle the Netscape browser (which they own) with AOL 7.0.
Especially now that MS is so agressively going after AOL's lunch, I hope AOL would get the clue that having their signup logo as an icon on the Windows desktop is of little help if they are reliant upon IE (which MS will always use to their advantage)
AOL needs to bundle the Netscape browser (which they own) with AOL 7.0.
Why does everyone think that all things Java MUST be interpreted? A suite of Java desktop apps could be natively compiled using something like TowerJ or GCJ along with the JRE installed as the static library. The speed and memory use would be very similar to C/C++ native apps.
(Yea, I realize interpreted code can be JIT compiled for speed, but the start-up time is annoying)
Agreed!
Swing is a very good GUI toolkit, and it's surprising that a desktop based on Swing hasn't been started similar to Gnome/Gtk and KDE/Qt. All the effort that Sun is putting into Gnome is work that COULD HAVE gone in to a Swing-based desktop.
(And I wish Sun would give up on this interpreted stuff and create a good native compiler for Java/Swing like what GCC is trying to do)
For anyone who doesn't know, KDE also has the option of a Mac-like global menu bar running along the top (changing context as focus changes) instead of the common style of inside individual windows.
2 .j pg
http://www.kde.org/screenshots/medium/matthiase
http://www.kde.org/screenshots/medium/sks1.jpg
Of course, one problem is that you still need to have the taskbar to get the K-button menu, but work is being done to have the K-button in the Mac-like global menu so that it works similar to the "Apple-logo" button.
http://mosfet.org/macmenu2.jpg
(2nd try- registration didn't work the first time and it went it as AC)
I made a post on Friday in the "purple book" thread (see my user info) that I still think that IBM should do their own Linux distro (or buy an existing one) for the same reasons as why the IBM PC was more quickly adopted by "corporate suits" than the other PC's at the time which they viewed as hobbyist toys (seeing the similarity to today as most "suits" view Linux this way). The Steve Mills quote was mentioned in the responses.
So how would this AIX->Linux switch happen?
1. IBM buys an established distro like RH or Suse, then GPL's the AIX tools, then rebuilds the distro to include those tools?
or
2. IBM GPL's the AIX tools, then rebuilds AIX around the Linux kernel, and calls it something like "AIX Open"? (which would essentially be IBM's Linux distro)
Yes, I realize IBM has said that they won't do their own distro... but I still think they should.
One of the biggest reasons for the success of the PC was not just the openess, but because the IBM brand name was something that provided a bit more confidence for "the corporate suits" to adopt... an image which Apple and Radio Shack didn't quite have then... and most distros don't quite have right now.
IBM should probably buy an existing distro like Redhat in addition to the multi-distro support they're already doing. Thanks to the GPL, all of their developments for their own distro will still be available to other distros who will in turn refine IBM's developments, and so on.
I've always liked the context-sensitive global menu at the top of the Mac screen instead of having them be a part of the individual windows like MS does.
Apple UI studies found that it's easier to just throw the mouse to the top instead of aiming for the menu in a window. Apparently (rumor) MS would have also done one global menu at the top like Mac were it not for Apple patent issues? Does anyone know if that's true?
Otherwise, KDE does allow a Mac-like global menu in it's theme preferences, but it's more of an afterthought. If Apple patent issues can be avoided, perhaps Gnome should default to a singular Mac-like global menu at the top? (menus in windows would still be available as an option)
Thoughts anyone?
From Mozilla 0.9.2 release notes:
n ", "noAccess");
The syntax for blocking pop-up windows has changed since Mozilla 0.9. To block pop-up windows, add this line to the prefs.js file in your Mozilla profile directory while Mozilla is not running:
user_pref("capability.policy.default.Window.ope
I've seen speculation that AOL was holding back on the Mozilla/Netscape browser for not wanting to make it look like IE *didn't* have a monopoly. Now what?
Apparently MS and AOL are also going back and forth on dealings for whether AOL will get an icon on the Win desktop or just bundle the Netscape browser with the next version of AOL. What about that now?
I'm running RH 7.1 (w Gnome) with the M$ TT fonts imported and used with Xfree.
Mozilla displays pages with the TT fonts just fine, but they don't seem to look right with Galeon. It looks as if Galeon is still using the old Adobe fonts and not the M$ TTFs... or simply not doing the TTFs right. (Yes, I've set the preferences correctly, and adjusted the font size spinner... but no luck)
Anyone else having this problem?
MDI is just a sloppy bandaid for not putting the menu bar at the top of the screen the way the Mac did it
Yea, but the reality is that Gnome or KDE don't have the menu bar across the top of the screen like a Mac, so you get the worst possible menu - neither across the top (like Mac) or at the top of a root window (like the Win version of PS). An MDI version of GIMP would be nice!
I'm used to using Photoshop on Windows where everything is within a root window and the images are in multiple windows within that root window (thus, MDI - multiple doc interface)
GIMP on Linux uses SDI (single doc interface) which, like the Mac version of Photshop, puts everything on the desktop instead of a root window. (Though some consider the desktop to be a root window in itself - I mean an app root window here)
Is there anyway to have GIMP work in MDI on Linux like Photoshop in Windows? A plugin or something? It's just a personal preference of mine, that's all.