For the entire 2 weeks I struggled against redhat, my box was named "localhost.localdomain".
Hmmmmmm... well, it took me only 10 minutes to figure out how to change mine, but then again I wasn't certain beforehand where to change it, other than that the file to change would be somewhere under/etc. A few greps here and there eventually turned up the file/etc/sysconfig/network.
The same thing (or other things like it) happened to me with configuring X, with setting up my network (which had strange enough details to prevent the configurator from being helpful) and even in trying to change my default login shell.
Well, I certainly found the so-called "X-configurator" (or whatever it's called) to be rather confusing and useless. It turned out to be simpler to me to just edit my XF86Config directly to put in the exact frequency settings from my monitor documentation. I can't comment on the network settings - this system uses only PPP. But I didn't even attempt to use any PPP "configurator" to set it up. I just downloaded Mindspring's instructions on how to set up Linux PPP by hand. Never had any trouble editing the/etc/hosts and/etc/ppp/options files directly, and I never saw any "popup" boxes come up automatically.
Certainly I've come across many "configurators" in my Redhat Linux distribution, and it is annoying that the Redhat docs concentrate so much on doing everything with linuxconf. But I haven't yet run across the situation where I had to use a "configurator" to do something. Then again, I haven't heard yet what version of Redhat you were trying to install. It could be that earlier versions relied so much on "configurators" that they caused complaints from some Redhat users, thus resulting in changes in later versions.
also found that RedHat was nearly impossible to use from the command line, right out of the box. It was missing important things in my path, like for example, "/usr/bin".
Hmmmm... again, very odd. I did not have that problem after I installed from the CD.
And yes, I am nothing more than a RedHat bashing perl script.
Well, not many people know this, but I'm actually a dog. I just read Slashdot when my Master's not using the system. Of course, I taught him everything he knows about Linux.:-)
And BTW, my apologies if my incredulous tone in my initial reply to your post led you to think I was questioning your "intelligence" and thus sparked this little flamefest - but doggone it, what did you expect from a mean-tempered Schnauzer? Just be glad I don't go over to your house and take a dump in your lawn!;-)
Don't know what the deal was with your Redhat installation. I've appreciated Redhat's somewhat easier install routines, and I don't mind having the option of using a "configurator" sometimes (the sound card config program was a nice touch). However, I will admit Redhat's documentation concentrates way too much on linuxconf than I care to deal with. Perhaps if this old dog can convince his Master to finish writing his Linux game project, he'll get his paws on Debian and try it out.
don't like Redhat much because it tries too hard to be like Windows,
Ah yes - Windoze. Hmph! After college, my Master spent two agonizing years doing Win32 programming. He was sure glad when I finally got him a job working on the Tomahawk Cruise missle project. The Dept. of Defense may not use Linux much (mostly Suns and HP-UX), but it sure beats Windoze!
And if I ever meet up with Bill Gates, I'll be sure to bite him on the leg for ya.
Until then, I'm off to find some other Slashdotters to take a piss on...;-)
Let's face it - the DirectX API is, technically, a heap of doggy-doo. As you said, you have never used Direct3D. If you had, you would not have said what you did
No, there you are wrong, my friend. I have seen enough code comparisons between Direct3D and OpenGL to know that Direct3D is a very poor choice. I will not say the same, however, for the rest of the DirectX API. DirectX may not be the best gaming API (before DirectX, I used Allegro, an excellent DOS-based API built with DJGPP), but it is a good API. You know that, because by your very own admission, you say "The features provided by the DirectX API are very useful, and there is a need for something like this in the industry."
Just because you and I share a dislike for Microsoft, let's not be bigots and say that everything Microsoft has created is bad. Part of the plan for ensuring "world domination" for Linux is recognizing what weaknesses Linux has, and how to make them better.
One API that does look promising is the Simple DirectMedia Layer. Check it out! I've downloaded the API and looked at it, and it seems very promising. My only problem with it right now is that it doesn't support X, but it at least is off to a very good start.
With Redhat 5.2, it must have taken me no more than ten minutes to figure out how to change the hostname (It's in/etc/sysconfig/network. You might also need to change/etc/hosts as well). Funny thing is, I didn't even know beforehand exactly where to look under/etc to change it. They still teach Unix newbies how to use grep, don't they?
Did leapfrog really meant to say that he took NINE DAYS to figure out how to change the hostname on Red Hat Linux? Sure the Redhat distribution may be a little different than the Slackware that he's used to (I've used both), but Lord help him if he ever has to use any other Unix than Linux, like AIX, HP-UX, or Solaris - all of which are but a few I've had to use in my line of work.
I just think people need to take a little more time to learn how to use any certain Linux distribution (be it Redhat, Debian, or whatever) before they start bashing it as a distribution for "clueless" Windows users. Clearly, leapfrog did not do that in the case of Redhat.
And BTW, guess who admits to using Redhat Linux on his own machine? Why none other than Linus Torvalds himself! Don't believe me? Read the answer to question 10 of Eric S. Raymond's FAQ on Linus. I think leapfrog may want to consider that fact before making statements that Redhat Linux is for clueless Windows users.
Actually I think you are simply some perl script coded with some AI to automatically bash Redhat users. Too bad it doesn't pass the Turing test.
I've used Redhat for a couple months now. I've edited lots of things by hand. I added a new user by hand, and even edited my XF86Config. I never had any trouble getting past any "popup" boxes. In fact I haven't even SEEN any popup boxes since I installed Linux. linuxconf has been available, if I wanted it, but I prefer not to use it - that's simply my own personal choice.
I have no idea what you are talking about, and quite frankly, neither do you.
Next time: practice what you preach. Take the time to learn how to use a distribution before you start bashing it, or you'll end up looking as you are now like the stupid clueless newbie you hate so much.
I installed Redhat Linux 5.2 a couple months ago. I had NO problem whatsoever in removing the admittedly annoying FVWM95 and installing WindowMaker instead (available on the Redhat CD). While I like the sexy sleek look of WindowMaker, I nevertheless have since downloaded the latest FVWM2 (*not* FVWM95), compiled and installed it in place of WindowMaker - mainly because I like the lower overhead and the very handy 3x3 pager. I also had no trouble customizing and recompiling the kernel and have done so several times.
I find it simply amazing that a person like you who bashes "clueless" newbies couldn't find a clue in the world to help you do something as simple as change a default RedHat system setup to something of your liking. It makes one wonder how you can even manage to run Linux, let alone use the slightly less user-friendly Debian distribution you so adore.
DirectX not really bad, but Linux/X11 is better
on
Gaming on Linux
·
· Score: 1
I have to disagree. I've used the DirectX API before, and while I admit it is a little tricky getting used to, I've been very impressed by its flexibility and performance. By contrast, programming at the X11 call level isn't much easier to learn.
Granted, I've only used DirectDraw, DirectInput, and DirectSound. I wouldn't touch Direct3D with a ten-foot pole.:-) Instead, I'd use OpenGL with DirectSound, like idSoftware did with Quake.
But quite frankly, I'm porting my DirectX game to Linux because I'm getting sick of developing it on Windows 95. I'll take FVWM2 with a 3x3 pager over Win95 and the restrictive Visual C++ IDE any day! Plus, X11 programming doesn't seem that much harder than DirectX, and I want to do my part to contribute anything I can to one day make Windows partitions a thing of the past!:-)
Here is a great place to start!
on
Gaming on Linux
·
· Score: 1
It may not be DirectX - but here's a great place for info on how to get started writing games for Linux/X11. Check out the Linux/X11 Game Writer's Page, maintained by Paul Coates. This page has lots of source code you can download and compile to show you how to do 2D graphics animation, mouse and keyboard input, and even digital audio. At the very least, download his demo programs, compile them and try them out. I've run them on my Intel P200 (running Linux) at home and an HP-UX workstation at work and they ran quite smoothly on both.
Also, download the source code to Maelstrom (a cool Asteroids-like game) and study carefully the source file x11_framebuf.cpp.
I've found these resources to be very helpful in my current effort to convert my own DirectX game project to Linux/X11. Give them a try, and let's get busy making games for Linux!
Dammit, I accidently hit the Submit button to early (by some freak combination of keystrokes: tab, then space, I think).:-)
As I was going to say I'm getting these new messages in/var/log/messages when I try to dial out to my ISP under the new 2.2.0 kernel (I'm not sure what revision is). I don't remember those messages verbatim (I'm not at my own machine right now), but they say that modprobe couldn't find modules of these names:
ppp-compress-21 ppp-compress-24 ppp-compress-56
Or something like that, I'm not sure if I remember the numbers at the ends correctly.
Anyway, pppd seems to work fine and successfully dials in to my ISP. I just wondered what might be causing the messages. I checked/lib/modules/net and I saw that ppp.o and ppp_deflate.o were in there. Anybody else getting strange messages like these? Could it be that pppd needs updating (I think the number to mine is: 2.3.5)?
I don't care about "free software" as much as I do about a free market software industry that is highly profitable and at the same provides as much freedom of choice and open standards to customers as possible. Free software, as well as other forms of Open Source software is certainly an excellent means of making this kind of free market possible, but I certainly don't care about it as a means in itself.
And as for "World Domination", GEEZ, people! Don't you know that Linus was only joking when he wrote that?:-) I'd rather work towards more freedom of choice, then "World Domination". I sure Linus agrees.
I don't mind people who volunteer. Kudos to Linus and to RMS as well (regardless of whether I disagree with RMS's extremist views on "free" software).
But what irritates me is the demonizing of those who have tried to bring free-market capitalism to the Open Source industry, including Tim O'Reilly whom Perens labels a "parasite". "Proprietary" manuals or not, I and many others have found O'Reilly's publications helpful and feel that he has made as decent a contribution to bringing awareness to Open Source software as much as anyone else. And if he has made a profit off of doing that, then I say, so much the better!
I think the Open Source industry (including free and non-free software) best serves the industry as a piece of the puzzle, not as an end in itself. Both proprietary and Open Source software should be able to co-exist together to bring more freedom of choice and standards to customers while at the same time making the industry as a whole financially viable and profitable.
Certainly let us honor those who have volunteered in this movement and encourage more to volunteer as well. But let us also honor those who have been able to gain more awareness for Open Source software (again, free and non-free) by turning it into a profitable industry.
Indeed, guns (or any weapon, for that matter) appear to be similar to emulators in that they have both legitimate and illegitimate uses. Because evil is a part of human nature, weapons such as guns are unfortunately necessary for protection against those of hostile intent. Of course, because guns are weapons, they also can and will be used by those same evil people with hostile intent.
Now, game emulators may not take human life (social life, maybe?:-), but as we know, they certainly are illegally used for pirating of console games. However, it could be argued that, like the duality of guns, emulators could have a legitimate purpose, such as allowing those of us with Linux machines who don't have a console to buy console games and play them via the emulator.
And I was just about to make that argument now, until I realized, that would rob console manufacturers of revenue from the consoles themselves, not just the console games. Oops! Scratch that idea.:-(
And yet, assuming that there would be console manufacturers that would be OK with emulators being used to play purchased console games, there is still the problem of ensuring that these emulators are being used legitimately, not for pirating games. Guns may be an unfortunate necessity in this evil world, but emulators are not.
Personally, I'd rather just see more commercial game support for Linux and avoid this whole mess.;-)
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmmmmm... well, it took me only 10 minutes to figure out how to change mine, but then again I wasn't certain beforehand where to change it, other than that the file to change would be somewhere under /etc. A few greps here and there eventually turned up the file /etc/sysconfig/network.
The same thing (or other things like it) happened to me with configuring X, with setting up my network (which had strange enough details to prevent the configurator from being helpful) and even in trying to change my default login shell.
Well, I certainly found the so-called "X-configurator" (or whatever it's called) to be rather confusing and useless. It turned out to be simpler to me to just edit my XF86Config directly to put in the exact frequency settings from my monitor documentation. I can't comment on the network settings - this system uses only PPP. But I didn't even attempt to use any PPP "configurator" to set it up. I just downloaded Mindspring's instructions on how to set up Linux PPP by hand. Never had any trouble editing the /etc/hosts and /etc/ppp/options files directly, and I never saw any "popup" boxes come up automatically.
Certainly I've come across many "configurators" in my Redhat Linux distribution, and it is annoying that the Redhat docs concentrate so much on doing everything with linuxconf. But I haven't yet run across the situation where I had to use a "configurator" to do something. Then again, I haven't heard yet what version of Redhat you were trying to install. It could be that earlier versions relied so much on "configurators" that they caused complaints from some Redhat users, thus resulting in changes in later versions.
also found that RedHat was nearly impossible to use from the command line, right out of the box. It was missing important things in my path, like for example, "/usr/bin".
Hmmmm... again, very odd. I did not have that problem after I installed from the CD.
And yes, I am nothing more than a RedHat bashing perl script.
Well, not many people know this, but I'm actually a dog. I just read Slashdot when my Master's not using the system. Of course, I taught him everything he knows about Linux. :-)
And BTW, my apologies if my incredulous tone in my initial reply to your post led you to think I was questioning your "intelligence" and thus sparked this little flamefest - but doggone it, what did you expect from a mean-tempered Schnauzer? Just be glad I don't go over to your house and take a dump in your lawn! ;-)
Don't know what the deal was with your Redhat installation. I've appreciated Redhat's somewhat easier install routines, and I don't mind having the option of using a "configurator" sometimes (the sound card config program was a nice touch). However, I will admit Redhat's documentation concentrates way too much on linuxconf than I care to deal with. Perhaps if this old dog can convince his Master to finish writing his Linux game project, he'll get his paws on Debian and try it out.
don't like Redhat much because it tries too hard to be like Windows,
Ah yes - Windoze. Hmph! After college, my Master spent two agonizing years doing Win32 programming. He was sure glad when I finally got him a job working on the Tomahawk Cruise missle project. The Dept. of Defense may not use Linux much (mostly Suns and HP-UX), but it sure beats Windoze!
And if I ever meet up with Bill Gates, I'll be sure to bite him on the leg for ya.
Until then, I'm off to find some other Slashdotters to take a piss on... ;-)
WOOF!
No, there you are wrong, my friend. I have seen enough code comparisons between Direct3D and OpenGL to know that Direct3D is a very poor choice. I will not say the same, however, for the rest of the DirectX API. DirectX may not be the best gaming API (before DirectX, I used Allegro, an excellent DOS-based API built with DJGPP), but it is a good API. You know that, because by your very own admission, you say "The features provided by the DirectX API are very useful, and there is a need for something like this in the industry."
Just because you and I share a dislike for Microsoft, let's not be bigots and say that everything Microsoft has created is bad. Part of the plan for ensuring "world domination" for Linux is recognizing what weaknesses Linux has, and how to make them better.
One API that does look promising is the Simple DirectMedia Layer. Check it out! I've downloaded the API and looked at it, and it seems very promising. My only problem with it right now is that it doesn't support X, but it at least is off to a very good start.
With Redhat 5.2, it must have taken me no more than ten minutes to figure out how to change the hostname (It's in /etc/sysconfig/network. You might also need to change /etc/hosts as well). Funny thing is, I didn't even know beforehand exactly where to look under /etc to change it. They still teach Unix newbies how to use grep, don't they?
Did leapfrog really meant to say that he took NINE DAYS to figure out how to change the hostname on Red Hat Linux? Sure the Redhat distribution may be a little different than the Slackware that he's used to (I've used both), but Lord help him if he ever has to use any other Unix than Linux, like AIX, HP-UX, or Solaris - all of which are but a few I've had to use in my line of work.
I just think people need to take a little more time to learn how to use any certain Linux distribution (be it Redhat, Debian, or whatever) before they start bashing it as a distribution for "clueless" Windows users. Clearly, leapfrog did not do that in the case of Redhat.
And BTW, guess who admits to using Redhat Linux on his own machine? Why none other than Linus Torvalds himself! Don't believe me? Read the answer to question 10 of Eric S. Raymond's FAQ on Linus. I think leapfrog may want to consider that fact before making statements that Redhat Linux is for clueless Windows users.
Actually I think you are simply some perl script coded with some AI to automatically bash Redhat users. Too bad it doesn't pass the Turing test.
I've used Redhat for a couple months now. I've edited lots of things by hand. I added a new user by hand, and even edited my XF86Config. I never had any trouble getting past any "popup" boxes. In fact I haven't even SEEN any popup boxes since I installed Linux. linuxconf has been available, if I wanted it, but I prefer not to use it - that's simply my own personal choice.
I have no idea what you are talking about, and quite frankly, neither do you.
Next time: practice what you preach. Take the time to learn how to use a distribution before you start bashing it, or you'll end up looking as you are now like the stupid clueless newbie you hate so much.
Here endeth the lesson...
I find it simply amazing that a person like you who bashes "clueless" newbies couldn't find a clue in the world to help you do something as simple as change a default RedHat system setup to something of your liking. It makes one wonder how you can even manage to run Linux, let alone use the slightly less user-friendly Debian distribution you so adore.
Granted, I've only used DirectDraw, DirectInput, and DirectSound. I wouldn't touch Direct3D with a ten-foot pole. :-) Instead, I'd use OpenGL with DirectSound, like idSoftware did with Quake.
But quite frankly, I'm porting my DirectX game to Linux because I'm getting sick of developing it on Windows 95. I'll take FVWM2 with a 3x3 pager over Win95 and the restrictive Visual C++ IDE any day! Plus, X11 programming doesn't seem that much harder than DirectX, and I want to do my part to contribute anything I can to one day make Windows partitions a thing of the past! :-)
Also, download the source code to Maelstrom (a cool Asteroids-like game) and study carefully the source file x11_framebuf.cpp.
I've found these resources to be very helpful in my current effort to convert my own DirectX game project to Linux/X11. Give them a try, and let's get busy making games for Linux!
Oh sorry... wrong forum.
As I was going to say I'm getting these new messages in
ppp-compress-21
ppp-compress-24
ppp-compress-56
Or something like that, I'm not sure if I remember the numbers at the ends correctly.
Anyway, pppd seems to work fine and successfully dials in to my ISP. I just wondered what might be causing the messages. I checked
And as for "World Domination", GEEZ, people! Don't you know that Linus was only joking when he wrote that? :-) I'd rather work towards more freedom of choice, then "World Domination". I sure Linus agrees.
But what irritates me is the demonizing of those who have tried to bring free-market capitalism to the Open Source industry, including Tim O'Reilly whom Perens labels a "parasite". "Proprietary" manuals or not, I and many others have found O'Reilly's publications helpful and feel that he has made as decent a contribution to bringing awareness to Open Source software as much as anyone else. And if he has made a profit off of doing that, then I say, so much the better!
I think the Open Source industry (including free and non-free software) best serves the industry as a piece of the puzzle, not as an end in itself. Both proprietary and Open Source software should be able to co-exist together to bring more freedom of choice and standards to customers while at the same time making the industry as a whole financially viable and profitable.
Certainly let us honor those who have volunteered in this movement and encourage more to volunteer as well. But let us also honor those who have been able to gain more awareness for Open Source software (again, free and non-free) by turning it into a profitable industry.
Now, game emulators may not take human life (social life, maybe? :-), but as we know, they certainly are illegally used for pirating of console games. However, it could be argued that, like the duality of guns, emulators could have a legitimate purpose, such as allowing those of us with Linux machines who don't have a console to buy console games and play them via the emulator.
And I was just about to make that argument now, until I realized, that would rob console manufacturers of revenue from the consoles themselves, not just the console games. Oops! Scratch that idea. :-(
And yet, assuming that there would be console manufacturers that would be OK with emulators being used to play purchased console games, there is still the problem of ensuring that these emulators are being used legitimately, not for pirating games. Guns may be an unfortunate necessity in this evil world, but emulators are not.
Personally, I'd rather just see more commercial game support for Linux and avoid this whole mess. ;-)