Perhaps Tramp is just not used that much, but I noticed that for RedHat 7.3 XEmacs has the Tramp, package, but GNU Emacs 21, does not. Does anyone know why this would be, or is this just an oversight?
I personally would really like to have this capability there by default, not that it is/that/ hard to install yourself, but why shouldn't I expect consistency:-)
As an aside, perhaps someone could post a link to the definitive URL for posting these types of suggestions to RedHat -- is it just bugzilla?
Since the 4.0, release RedHat has done a.0 ->.1 ->.2 ->.0 release. I cannot comment officially on how this happened, but I was watching Rawhide, and up until about 3 weeks ago, RedHat had gcc 3.1 as their primary/only compiler, then all of the sudden, they reverted back to a gcc-2.96 and gcc 3.0.4 combo. I assume this was the point where they decided to release a 7.3 instead of an 8.0. Perhaps it had to do with the maturity of the 3.1 compiler, perhaps something else, but it is surely a deviation from their established timeline.
As a sidenote, though I am very excited about gcc 3.1 which branched on Feb 28, I think that RedHat's move is a good one. They can use this time to perhaps plan an 8.0 release that will support x86-64 (Hammer) architecture.
One reason windows has an edge is compiler technology. Right now, distributions are compiled with gcc 2.95 or RedHat's 2.96. These compilers are improved over earlier versions, but the gcc 3.x line will have major improvements for the Intel Architectures. (I am unsure what kind of optimization improvements there are for other machines.)
My point is, with distributions moving to 3.1 hopefully in the near future (gcc 3.1 is scheduled to be released on April 15, 2002) this will improve speed for everyone on Intel/AMD platforms. The kernel will be faster, and all the applications will benefit; not only from the improved speed of the kernel, but speed their own speed improvements.
I posted this before as AC, but since it didn't get any points, I thought no one would see it, and I _do_ think it might help.
Actually, Alvy Ray Smith with Ed Catmull created an alpha compositing system in 1978 while Ed Catmull was doing a paper for SIGGRAPH '78.
He states this in his paper "Alpha and the History of Digital Compositing" in August 1995.
He says that his earliest dated documentation he has for that code is dated January 13, 1978. He specifically showed compositing an alpha image on a background which should just be like another image. I hope this helps
I had the same problem. Could not install on the server with NFS. I wrote them about it and had a small back and forth e-mail conversation. The result was that they said they would fix it in the next version. Well... we'll see.
Thank you. I am getting sick of everyone that is so pro-metric. Metric makes sense with our number system, but necessarily the way we think. We think in terms of fourths and thirds, and they are better divisors anyway. I like the merits of the system that developed from use -- not just from one man. Most of the time I don't think, "That's would be just fine; if only it were a tenth that size." 3/4, 1/2, 2/3 -- They are natural. The best answer would be to change our number system to base 12 -- think about all the advantages 12 has. That won't happen, and neither will the American's change to the metric system.
I personally use the aforementioned tools, but the one thing I would like to see, is some way of doing project cross reference of functions, class data, etc. That is the biggest advantage of a good IDE to me. I like to easily jump around files and trace things.
I guess, I just wanted to throw my two cents in. I have installed RH on 14 machines now, and frankly there apps that are NOT as stable as usual, but I believe it to be in the name of progress. Nobody has to use gnome and E, I happen to like them both, (they use too much memory, but still less than windowsNT, and I don't have pixmap themes there:-) -- My point is basically that I have had a few problems, but I haven't had to reboot, I have just had to fix some problems, like the/dev/ resources being taken by non-root owners and not released; or E, sticks, or gnome loads up slow, but I STILL think they are an improvement for the new people. These environments WILL move people towards linux, and I think that is good thing... My wife feels much more comfortable accessing linux now simply because of gnome, and I have been surprised at how fast the gnome project is moving. Many will argue that gnome and E should not be the default, I think that is true, but what should? I HATE kde, it is not as configurable, and toooooo windowy (for me). Well, I hope things get better, but in the meantime, I think they already are in some ways. People may not remember, but there were all kinds of problems with 5.0 when they changed to glibc. Most of are glad of that though.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps Tramp is just not used that much, but I noticed that for RedHat 7.3 XEmacs has the Tramp, package, but GNU Emacs 21, does not. Does anyone know why this would be, or is this just an oversight?
/that/ hard to install yourself, but why shouldn't I expect consistency :-)
I personally would really like to have this capability there by default, not that it is
As an aside, perhaps someone could post a link to the definitive URL for posting these types of suggestions to RedHat -- is it just bugzilla?
Thanks.
Since the 4.0, release RedHat has done a .0 -> .1 -> .2 -> .0 release. I cannot comment officially on how this happened, but I was watching Rawhide, and up until about 3 weeks ago, RedHat had gcc 3.1 as their primary/only compiler, then all of the sudden, they reverted back to a gcc-2.96 and gcc 3.0.4 combo. I assume this was the point where they decided to release a 7.3 instead of an 8.0. Perhaps it had to do with the maturity of the 3.1 compiler, perhaps something else, but it is surely a deviation from their established timeline.
As a sidenote, though I am very excited about gcc 3.1 which branched on Feb 28, I think that RedHat's move is a good one. They can use this time to perhaps plan an 8.0 release that will support x86-64 (Hammer) architecture.
One reason windows has an edge is compiler technology. Right now, distributions are compiled with gcc 2.95 or RedHat's 2.96. These compilers are improved over earlier versions, but the gcc 3.x line will have major improvements for the Intel Architectures. (I am unsure what kind of optimization improvements there are for other machines.)
My point is, with distributions moving to 3.1 hopefully in the near future (gcc 3.1 is scheduled to be released on April 15, 2002) this will improve speed for everyone on Intel/AMD platforms. The kernel will be faster, and all the applications will benefit; not only from the improved speed of the kernel, but speed their own speed improvements.
I posted this before as AC, but since it didn't get any points, I thought no one would see it, and I _do_ think it might help.
Actually, Alvy Ray Smith with Ed Catmull created an alpha compositing system in 1978 while Ed Catmull was doing a paper for SIGGRAPH '78.
He states this in his paper "Alpha and the History of Digital Compositing" in August 1995.
He says that his earliest dated documentation he has for that code is dated January 13, 1978. He specifically showed compositing an alpha image on a background which should just be like another image. I hope this helps
I had the same problem. Could not install on the server with NFS. I wrote them about it and had a small back and forth e-mail conversation. The result was that they said they would fix it in the next version. Well... we'll see.
Hope we don't get to offtopic, but:
:-)
What is the status of the kernel compiling with the latest versions of gcc? Is 2.4 going to compile with gcc-2.95.x or gcc 3?
May I also say how appreciative I was of bero-rh's comments. It is nice to hear information straight from the source.
--
The best one I have heard is "Wintendo." Just being evangelical
Thank you. I am getting sick of everyone that is so pro-metric. Metric makes sense with our number system, but necessarily the way we think. We think in terms of fourths and thirds, and they are better divisors anyway. I like the merits of the system that developed from use -- not just from one man. Most of the time I don't think, "That's would be just fine; if only it were a tenth that size." 3/4, 1/2, 2/3 -- They are natural. The best answer would be to change our number system to base 12 -- think about all the advantages 12 has. That won't happen, and neither will the American's change to the metric system.
I personally use the aforementioned tools, but the one thing I would like to see, is some way of doing project cross reference of functions, class data, etc. That is the biggest advantage of a good IDE to me. I like to easily jump around files and trace things.
I guess, I just wanted to throw my two cents in. :-) -- My point is basically that I have had a few problems, but I haven't had to reboot, I have just had to fix some problems, like the /dev/ resources being taken by non-root owners and not released; or E, sticks, or gnome loads up slow, but I STILL think they are an improvement for the new people. These environments WILL move people towards linux, and I think that is good thing... My wife feels much more comfortable accessing linux now simply because of gnome, and I have been surprised at how fast the gnome project is moving. Many will argue that gnome and E should not be the default, I think that is true, but what should? I HATE kde, it is not as configurable, and toooooo windowy (for me). Well, I hope things get better, but in the meantime, I think they already are in some ways. People may not remember, but there were all kinds of problems with 5.0 when they changed to glibc. Most of are glad of that though.
I have installed RH on 14 machines now, and frankly there apps that are NOT as stable as usual, but I believe it to be in the name of progress. Nobody has to use gnome and E, I happen to like them both, (they use too much memory, but still less than windowsNT, and I don't have pixmap themes there