Expecting modern browsers to run on a computer that old is pretty ridiculous.
I don't know why so many people say this.
I've already found two modern browsers that run very well on this machine: Opera and Dillo.
Making statements like yours is rather ridiculous
when there is evidence to the contrary.
I might try links 2.0 - it looks promising. Elinks comes with RH73,
and it's the best text-mode browser I've ever
used. Much better than w3m and lynx, IMHO.
libXm.so should be installed with X in/usr/X11R6/lib. Try adding a symlink from/usr/X11R6/lib/libXm.so to whatever version you have installed there and running opera.
Actually, libXm.so is part of openmotif, not X.
I found the solution to getting opera working
under RedHat 7.3 here.
How did you get Red Hat 7.3 to install in 20Mb? Red Hat's minimum recommended install is 64Mb, and you can get away with 48Mb, but you must have done some exciting tweaking to get it to install in 20Mb!
It forced me to do a text-mode install, and turned on the swap space early, but I didn't have to do
any amount of tweaking.
Also what desktop are you running? I've had no success with either Gnome or KDE in 32Mb. And what window manager?
Desktop? We don't need no steenking desktop!!
I'm not even going to try.
As for a window manager, I'm currently running fvwm2. I can't figure out how to get it into fvwm95 mode though.
I've heard a lot of good things about IcwWM, so I'll probably give that a shot.
So, I have and old Pentium 66 with 20MB ram
running in my workshop. I just want to use it
for some casual web browsing. It's currently
running Red Hat 7.3
I'm having a heck of a time finding a lean browser to run on this thing. I haven't even attempted Mozilla. Galeon is too big, sending my poor machine deep into swap. I tried downloading Opera, but it kept complaining about
not finding the right version of libXm.so, even with the statically-linked version.
I see lots of talk about how fast this Phoenix is, but I've yet to see *any* mention about its memory footprint. Is it really lean, or is it simply lean as compared to Mozilla?
I now have dillo running, and it looks promising. Any other suggestions?
(No, buying a new computer is not an option. I remember running browsers on my old 486, so this shouldn't be impossible!)
If PostgreSQL could magically don an Oracular CIO-level reputation, the bottom half - or more - of the Oracle market would evapourate in a few short years.
I work for a Fortune 100 corporation and we use a server room full of Oracle boxes.
Well then, you obviously don't belong to the "bottom half" of the Oracle market, do you?
In general, I'm against the idea of forcing TV
manufacturers to do this.
However, my biggest pet peeve with Satellite TV and
digital cable is that you have to have a tuner
that's separate from your TV. That means that
you've lost the ability to watch one show on the
TV while recording another on the VCR. It means
you have to add yet another remote to your
collection. This is the main reason why I stick
to basic, analog cable.
Now, if TV's (and VCR's) had digital receivers,
and if these receivers worked with satellite
and digital cable as well as broadcast HDTV,
without the crappy advertisement-laden "channel-selection" interface that the current
digital-cable boxes provide,
then I might actually want to buy one
of these things.
If you want a stable ABI, then stop upgrading.
Sheesh. It's not that freaking hard to figure out,
is it?
Now for those of us who prefer a standard-compliant compiler, we can keep upgrading.
The problem is, you want both, and for some reason you can't beat it into your thick skull that development of a compiler is a VERY HARD THING and it takes lots of TIME to
get it right.
No, you'd rather just bitch and moan that the developers are lazy, incompetant dumbasses. I bet
you could code up a completely standards-compliant, multi-platform, multi-language, optimizing compiler in no time at all, eh?
If you want to admit you were just frustrated at the current state of things and allowed your frustration to turn into that boneheaded rant, then fine. But don't try to excuse your behavior
by stating that you "just want" something.
If you had bothered yourself to look into gcc's history, you would have found that, given a version of x.y.z, if x or y changes, then they
have broken binary compatibility, probably even
in C programs.
This is not a recent change in gcc development
philosophy. It has always been this way.
It doesn't matter what you think "most Free Software projects" do. This is how gcc has
ALWAYS done their versioning. And gcc development
predates most of your other "free software" projects.
You may call your trolling "venting", but so far
the problems you have described are due to your
own ignorance.
Go learn something about gcc development before
complaining about it. Gcc may not be perfect,
but 3.1 is one of the most standards-compliant
C++ compilers available today, and it's due to
the hard work and dedication of those currently
working on it.
Short answer: the gcc crew is lazy, inconsiderate, or both.
Or, you're lazy, inconsiderate, and trolling.
The C++ ABI keeps changing because they are fixing
bugs in the current compiler and C++ Standard Library.
You can look up the reasons for the compiler-side
ABI changes here
The GNU implementation of the Standard C++ Library
has been woefully uncompliant until work was begun
on the 3.x version of the library (which was first
included in the 3.X versions of the compiler and
RedHat's 2.96 version of the compiler).
So, the real reason why they keep breaking binary
compatibility (and it's usually only C++
compatibility) is that they are NOT lazy, but
working VERY HARD to create a standards-compliant
compiler and library.
For those who dare moderate this thread up...
on
New Palm Pictures?
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
...just remember what the editors do to people
who reply to or moderate up blatantly off-topic posts.
Hint: check the link in my sig.
Since I've already been bitch-slapped, I think
I'm safe from further repurcussions.
Although, this post should allow me to find out
what the next step down from "excellent" is!
I always thought your sig was cool, until I learned that you are A MOLECULAR BIOLOGIST WHO GRAFTS SUICIDE GENES INTO VIRUSES TO PLACE INTO HUMAN BODIES!!!!!
Kernel developers aren't going to run back to Windows crying.
No, but it's still impolite to tell someone that they're "full of shit", especially when the *do*
tend to know something about what they are working on.
On a side note, is there any technical problem which has stop diesel electric hybrids in cars (they have diesel electric trains). Seems to me you would get a more fuel efficent car than a gas electric.
I guess the quick answer is "no".
But just FYI, a diesel-electric train works differently than a gas-electric hybrid car.
The diesel engine in a train does one thing: it turns an alternator to produce electricity. This
electricity is then used to run the electric motors to turn the wheels.
The hybrid cars usually still have the engine hooked up to the wheels using a driveshaft, and
the electric motor just supplements the engine
(or vise-versa).
Slashdot Mirror
I might try links 2.0 - it looks promising. Elinks comes with RH73, and it's the best text-mode browser I've ever used. Much better than w3m and lynx, IMHO.
I found the solution to getting opera working under RedHat 7.3 here.
My point was that I know this machine has enough oomph to run a web browser. I just need to find that browser now.
That might actually be a decent option.I power off the monitor when not in use though :-)
I suggest you have a look at links instead. Much better.
And in case you couldn't guess, I'm interested in a graphical browser. :-)
As for a window manager, I'm currently running fvwm2. I can't figure out how to get it into fvwm95 mode though.
I've heard a lot of good things about IcwWM, so I'll probably give that a shot.
I'm having a heck of a time finding a lean browser to run on this thing. I haven't even attempted Mozilla. Galeon is too big, sending my poor machine deep into swap. I tried downloading Opera, but it kept complaining about not finding the right version of libXm.so, even with the statically-linked version.
I see lots of talk about how fast this Phoenix is, but I've yet to see *any* mention about its memory footprint. Is it really lean, or is it simply lean as compared to Mozilla?
I now have dillo running, and it looks promising. Any other suggestions?
(No, buying a new computer is not an option. I remember running browsers on my old 486, so this shouldn't be impossible!)
Let's see:
- IBM gets German government contract
- MandrakeSoft wins French government contract
- IBM sells Linux to Air Force & other government agencies
Looks like IBM has you covered again. I'm pretty sure most fire/police/ambulance services operate 24/7 too.For the type of service you want for a system with Linux machines, I think IBM probably is the only way to go at this point.
What's that? They don't make such a thing? Then shut up and sit down, troll.
However, my biggest pet peeve with Satellite TV and digital cable is that you have to have a tuner that's separate from your TV. That means that you've lost the ability to watch one show on the TV while recording another on the VCR. It means you have to add yet another remote to your collection. This is the main reason why I stick to basic, analog cable.
Now, if TV's (and VCR's) had digital receivers, and if these receivers worked with satellite and digital cable as well as broadcast HDTV, without the crappy advertisement-laden "channel-selection" interface that the current digital-cable boxes provide, then I might actually want to buy one of these things.
I'd vote you up, but:
Now for those of us who prefer a standard-compliant compiler, we can keep upgrading.
The problem is, you want both, and for some reason you can't beat it into your thick skull that development of a compiler is a VERY HARD THING and it takes lots of TIME to get it right.
No, you'd rather just bitch and moan that the developers are lazy, incompetant dumbasses. I bet you could code up a completely standards-compliant, multi-platform, multi-language, optimizing compiler in no time at all, eh?
If you want to admit you were just frustrated at the current state of things and allowed your frustration to turn into that boneheaded rant, then fine. But don't try to excuse your behavior by stating that you "just want" something.
This is not a recent change in gcc development philosophy. It has always been this way. It doesn't matter what you think "most Free Software projects" do. This is how gcc has ALWAYS done their versioning. And gcc development predates most of your other "free software" projects.
You may call your trolling "venting", but so far the problems you have described are due to your own ignorance.
Go learn something about gcc development before complaining about it. Gcc may not be perfect, but 3.1 is one of the most standards-compliant C++ compilers available today, and it's due to the hard work and dedication of those currently working on it.
The C++ ABI keeps changing because they are fixing bugs in the current compiler and C++ Standard Library.
You can look up the reasons for the compiler-side ABI changes here
The GNU implementation of the Standard C++ Library has been woefully uncompliant until work was begun on the 3.x version of the library (which was first included in the 3.X versions of the compiler and RedHat's 2.96 version of the compiler).
So, the real reason why they keep breaking binary compatibility (and it's usually only C++ compatibility) is that they are NOT lazy, but working VERY HARD to create a standards-compliant compiler and library.
Hint: check the link in my sig.
Since I've already been bitch-slapped, I think I'm safe from further repurcussions. Although, this post should allow me to find out what the next step down from "excellent" is!
Guess I should have put a smiley face on the end, eh?
Oh well. At least he said it to Linus, who should obviously be able to take it since he dishes it out so well. :^)
The diesel engine in a train does one thing: it turns an alternator to produce electricity. This electricity is then used to run the electric motors to turn the wheels.
The hybrid cars usually still have the engine hooked up to the wheels using a driveshaft, and the electric motor just supplements the engine (or vise-versa).