Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #410
From: Digestifier <Linux-Misc-Request@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>
To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: Linux-Misc@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU
Date:     Sat, 11 Dec 93 05:13:08 EST

Linux-Misc Digest #410, Volume #1                Sat, 11 Dec 93 05:13:08 EST

Contents:
  Re: libg.a size (David Fox)
  Re: Yet another benchmark results.. (Brian)
  Re: Adaptec--1542C--Where to get? (Christopher Shaulis)
  Answers to my questions! (Steve Tate)
  Re: Linux Consortium (Mark Line)
  UNIX/PC Sys Admin opinions (Joe Ryan)
  Re: Linux Consortium (Matt Welsh)
  Re: Linux counter: Usage growth of Linux (Dirk Hohndel)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: fox@graphics.cs.nyu.edu (David Fox)
Subject: Re: libg.a size
Date: 11 Dec 1993 05:53:01 GMT

In article <2ebf8m$gnc@mtu.edu> blhuber@mtu.edu (Brett L. Huber) writes:

] I got one for the library people:  Why is libg.a so spectacularly huge?

The stdio library is implemented on top of the C++ stream
library, and C++ code has lengthy symbols that produce
lots of debugging info.

I'm glad you asked, libg.a was not installed on my
slackware 1.1.1 system because it wouldn't overwrite
the link libg.a -> libc.a.

------------------------------

From: bmork@opus-ovh.spk.wa.us (Brian)
Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware,comp.os.vms,comp.benchmarks,relcom.t
Subject: Re: Yet another benchmark results..
Date: 11 Dec 93 05:19:46 GMT

walk@mrcnext.cso.uiuc.edu (Todd Walk) writes:

> Accuarate benchmarking is something that the Federal Government
> spends millions of $$$ on for grants to university professors
> who then work for YEARS refining test suites.

Tests by the federal government for $$$.  Boo.  Last year I read of the
high school graduate SAT scores.  A certain class of people scored
too low (women vs men, but please don't turn this into a social thread).
The governmental statement?  The test must be changed because what
we already "know to be true" (class1=class2) wasn't supported by
the test.

I balked at the phrase "refining test suites."  This sounds like tweaking
the test until the "right" answers come out!

---
Brian Mork   Internet bmork@opus-ovh.spk.wa.us (BBS 509-244-9260)
 .  . . ..   Amateur Radio (AX.25) ka9snf@wb7nnf.#spokn.wa.usa
... .  .     USMail 6006-B Eaker, Fairchild, WA 99011

------------------------------

From: cjs@netcom.com (Christopher Shaulis)
Subject: Re: Adaptec--1542C--Where to get?
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 06:58:00 GMT

meo@solbourne.com (Chuck Meo) writes:

>It looks to me like this controller is the way to go. Does anyone care
>to suggest what a reasonable price to pay for this thing might be and
>where?

>Either Denver area or mail order.

Get yourself a copy of the Computer Shooper and check out the ads. The
best price I could find was at a place called D-C-Drives. Current average
street price for a 1542C is $240 with dos drivers and $210 bare.
 
I think I've got the process of installing the 1542Cs down pat. Send E-mail
if you need any help.
 
Christopher

  ___     _  ___   ____  _  _ ___ _____  ___  ___  __  __     ___  ___  __  __ 
 / __|_  | |/ __| / __ \| \| | __|_   _|/ __|/ _ \|  \/  |   / __|/ _ \|  \/  |
| (__| |_| |\__ \/ / _` | .` | _|  | | | (__| (_) | |\/| | _| (__| (_) | |\/| |
 \___|\___/ |___/\ \__,_|_|\_|___| |_|  \___|\___/|_|  |_|(_)\___|\___/|_|  |_|
==================\____/=======================================================


------------------------------

From: srt@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Steve Tate)
Subject: Answers to my questions!
Date: 3 Dec 93 22:34:19 GMT


I posted a while back about some problems I was having with my newly
installed Linux distribution.  I didn't get many responses other than
"post what you find out", so I did some digging and found the solutions
to my problems.  For those who are interested, here's a summary:

1.  How do you set the auto-repeat rate for the keyboard?

    I was on the wrong track looking in the kernel source --- the
    auto-repeat is done in hardware, not software.  However, it can
    also be changed by sending the right codes to the hardware.  There
    is a program called "kbdrate" that does exactly this.  I found
    this program in the Linux archives on ftp.uu.net, in the util-etc...
    archive.

2.  Why is LILO starting Linux by default the first time I boot after
    a Linux session, rather than DOS which is set up as the default?

    It turns out that "the first time" part of the question was leading
    me in the wrong, and very confusing direction.  The reason it did
    this only the first time was because I was resetting the unrequested
    Linux boot before it completed.   The problem was that in the SLS
    distribution, /etc/rc.local always runs the script /etc/lilo/bootparams,
    which sets up Linux as the system to boot "next time" --- I suppose
    this is so that /etc/shutdown can re-boot Linux, but it was what
    was causing my problems.  Renaming /etc/lilo/bootparams fixes
    this right up.

Anyway, I hope some people find this information useful.  I'm by no means
a Linux expert, but I'm enjoying it more now that things are getting to
a usable configuration.


-- 
Steve Tate  ---  srt@cs.unt.edu   |
Dept. of Computer Sciences        |  Danger:  .sig construction in progress.
University of North Texas         |           Expect delays.
Denton, TX  76201                 |

------------------------------

From: markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Mark Line)
Subject: Re: Linux Consortium
Date: 11 Dec 93 07:28:34 GMT

mdw@cs.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh) writes:

>>Since the use of the
>>word "Linux" in reference to a software product has priority to its
>>use in reference to the Consortium, the intended meaning should be
>>clear to most English native speakers: 

>Most Linux users aren't native English speakers.

I wasn't aware of that. Do you have that information from the guy who
runs the Linux Counter, or do you have other sources? I failed to
mention what my native language was when I sent my counter ping.

>I don't claim to speak for the Linux community. It's obvious in the
>term "Linux Distribution Review Team" that the phrase "Linux
>Distribution" by itself has meaning, and if you group the words as so:
>"(Linux Distribution) (Review Team)" you're referring to Linux
>distributions. There is no such grouping in something as ambiguous as
>"Linux Consortium". 

In that case, then, you'd be happy with "Linux Distribution Consortium"?

>>My view stands: Call it Linux if it deals with Linux, call it a
>>Consortium if it's a consortium. It is both, so the name can stand.

>Thanks for making that decision for the rest of us.

I did nothing of the kind. That's why I included the first three words
you quoted above -- my intent was just to indicate that you'd not yet
convinced me otherwise.

>Using "Linux" in the name alone does not make it "official". What
>makes it "official" is a (for lack of a better word) pompous title
>like "Linux Consortium". So far, all of the people who have opposed
>the name "Linux Consortium" have been old-time Linux activists and
>developers, and those who are supporting it are mostly newcomers. Does
>this tell you something?

Yes. It tells me that the Linux activist/developer old-boy network
feels threatened, even though it is not (is it?). It also reminds me
that many newcomers are intimidated when their distributors respond to
problem queries with "It's real easy for you to fix yourself" and that
fix involves recompiling and installing the kernel.  I understand your
point about pomposity, and I don't want to offend the Linux
development community (see below). I just think that it's sometimes
best to fight fire with fire.

>Again, "Linux Distribution Review Team" sounds better, less formal,
>less pompous, and it relays the same informaion in a less intimidating
>way. But, still, you argue for "Linux Consortium", probably so you can
>have something cute to include in your .signature when you're a
>member. Why? What do you gain by using the name "Linux Consortium",
>other than the scorn of Linux developers who know that it's bogus? 

If that name draws the scorn mostly of the Linux developers, then
that's an argument Magnus would have to consider. So far, that has not
been my impression. Until now, people have attacked the name or the
whole idea on various grounds, but this is the first time somebody has
spoken up for the developers and stated that they would be offended by
the name. Who are the *official* speakers for the Linux development
community, and what is their opinion about the name? Or are *you*
their spokesman? As you said -- I'm a relative newcomer to Linux, so I
really don't know if you are their spokesman or not. I assumed Linus
or Lars was.

>Yawn. You continue to misunderstand my point, and the point of others,
>entirely by taking this pedantic attitude. Step back for a minute and
>consider: Why is the name "Linux Consortium" so important? Several
>people have immediately pointed out problems with the name, but I
>can't see any benefits to that title which outweigh the objections. If
>"Linux Distribution Review Team" relays the same information and
>doesn't offend the developers, why not use that instead?

As I mentioned above: if there is somebody who can speak for the Linux
developers and who will actually come out and say that they would be
offended by the use of the name "Linux Consortium" by others than
themselves, then that would be good enough for me.

From what you've said about offialdom and pomposity, and about the
offense the developers might take at the proposed name of the LC, I
assume you're attacking me for wanting do do things as a newcomer and
as a non-Linux-developer (I can't speak for Magnus) that you think I
should leave to others. Why is that? Who the hell do you think I was
*talking* to when I let go my sarcastic blast about Linux being only
for hackers? The Mormon Tabernacle Choir?

Maybe you've finally gotten the point. Support the extra-developmental
user community, or the user community takes certain things into their
own hands. Nearly always. An old-timer like yourself will recall lots
of examples.

To the developers: *Talk* to us. Or put up with the consequences. And
read Frankenstein over the holidays.

-- Mark

====================================================================
Mark P. Line                       Phone: +1-206-733-6040
Open Pathways                        Fax: +1-206-733-6040
P.O. Box F                         Email: markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu
Bellingham, WA 98227-0296
====================================================================

------------------------------

From: ryan@magnet.fsu.edu (Joe Ryan)
Subject: UNIX/PC Sys Admin opinions
Date: 3 Dec 93 20:22:54 GMT

Attention UNIX/PC System Administrators!

I would like to have some general/specific opinions from people
who read this newsgroup and would have any advice or comment (from 
experience) on any of the following:

              LINUX
              386BSD
              FreeBSD                 <---- these are not listed
              NetBSD                        in any prferential order.
              Minix
              or any other

I am soon to start a project wherein I need to install one of
the above onto a 486DX2 VLB with a 430Mb IDE HD,
16Mb RAM, an SMC ethernet card, and a VGA monitor. (I'll change
any specific item(s) if necessary, but this looks like the most
likely setup.)

I need to know which is the best route to go and *your* opinion
as to why.  I am also curious as to ease of installation, compatibility
with third party software packages, etc. - anything one can think
of that's important.  I am not looking for FAQs; I have downloaded
most already.

The primary, initial, function will be to set up eMail accounts,
running sendmail and some POP mail daemon. (POP is used extensively
here.)

Please send your responses to me: ryan@magnet.fsu.edu.  If you post it to
the board for some reason, please cc a copy directly to me so that I
don't miss it.

Thanks in advance.
Joe Ryan

____________________________________________________________
Joe Ryan                                ryan@magnet.fsu.edu
MARTECH/Physics
Florida State University
============================================================

------------------------------

From: mdw@cs.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh)
Subject: Re: Linux Consortium
Date: Sat, 11 Dec 1993 08:53:07 GMT

In article <1993Dec11.072834.7142@henson.cc.wwu.edu> markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Mark Line) writes:
>>Most Linux users aren't native English speakers.
>
>I wasn't aware of that. Do you have that information from the guy who
>runs the Linux Counter, or do you have other sources? I failed to
>mention what my native language was when I sent my counter ping.

Not offhand, but it seems to be clear (to most people, this being a
completely a priori judgement of my own) that most Linux users aren't
in the US, or other native-English-speaking countries. Linux is very
large in Europe, especially Germany and Finland (wonder why?), and 
interest in Japan appears to be quite large.

I don't consider the Linux Counter to (currently) be an accurate
portrayal of the Linux population, keeping in mind that there is a
large group of Linux users without Net access. (Perhaps even larger
than the population WITH Net access, but that can be argued either
way.) In any case, the non-English-speaking percentage of Linux users
is large enough to warrant this concern when considering the name
"Linux Consortium". 

>In that case, then, you'd be happy with "Linux Distribution Consortium"?

Better, but "Consortium" still seems to be a bit heavy. "Consortium"
carries the overtones of a standards organization, or some kind of
official, formal organization that makes policy decisions regarding
Linux, none of which exists. I know that "Consortium" alone doesn't
fit this description, but it's in the same ballpark. "Review Board" is
what you're aiming at, I think---there's no reason to be any more
official-lookking than you have to be.

>Yes. It tells me that the Linux activist/developer old-boy network
>feels threatened, even though it is not (is it?). 

I don't feel threatened. I don't think anyone does, not by this. The
point is, we don't want newcomers to observe the presence of this kind
of "official" Linux cabal which really isn't official at all. The name
"Linux Consortium" is simply a misrepresentation of the duties and
responsibilities of the review board. It's unnecessarily confusing.

>It also reminds me
>that many newcomers are intimidated when their distributors respond to
>problem queries with "It's real easy for you to fix yourself" and that
>fix involves recompiling and installing the kernel.  I understand your
>point about pomposity, and I don't want to offend the Linux
>development community (see below). I just think that it's sometimes
>best to fight fire with fire.

I'm not sure how using the name "Linux Consortium" fights that fire.
The JOB of the Linux Consortium certainly does---I'm not really
opposed to the idea of an informal "review board" passing along
helpful advice to new users trying to pick out a new distribution. I
could do the same in the Distribution-HOWTO, but I try to remain
unbiased in order not to offend anyone. Everyone has a different
opinion. 

But there is no Linux cabal. (What do I hear? Booing from the peanut
gallery?) The "Linux Consortium" certainly isn't one, either. Unless
the Linux development and support community at large were to shift
towards a centralized development team, a la 386BSD, the idea of an
"official" LC is out of place.

>If that name draws the scorn mostly of the Linux developers, then
>that's an argument Magnus would have to consider. So far, that has not
>been my impression. Until now, people have attacked the name or the
>whole idea on various grounds, but this is the first time somebody has
>spoken up for the developers and stated that they would be offended by
>the name.

I don't mean to speak up for the developers---I only speak for myself.
My impression was that developers might be (and some apparently are)
offended by the name. It's like calling a startup "Linux Labs". While
that kind of thing is easy to ignore, it rubs certain developers the
wrong way---it seems to be taking credit for Linux itself, and the
folks at "Linux Labs" can't do that. 

>Who are the *official* speakers for the Linux development
>community, and what is their opinion about the name? Or are *you*
>their spokesman? 

No, not at all. There are no official speakers. However, "Linux
Consortium" would appear to be one, if presented in that manner.
That's the point here---there is no central organization for Linux
development. "Linux Consortium" sounds like it's trying to be one---I
don't think that the name clearly represents that it's nothing more
than an ad hoc review board for the "quality" (however you want to
define that) of Linux distributions.

Better to avoid misrepresentation by choosing a name that won't
confuse and possibly offend people.

>From what you've said about offialdom and pomposity, and about the
>offense the developers might take at the proposed name of the LC, I
>assume you're attacking me for wanting do do things as a newcomer and
>as a non-Linux-developer (I can't speak for Magnus)

No, I'm not judging any of this based on your background, neither for
Magnus. In fact, I know little about your background and didn't know
that you were a Linux "newcomer", as you stated. That's really beside
the point. If Linus himself came up with the idea I'm sure it would
meet with objection. 

>To the developers: *Talk* to us. Or put up with the consequences.

That's another problem: The developers shouldn't *have* to put up with
anything. Linus can decide to yank the whole project if he wanted
to. If so, I doubt you'd have an easy time finding someone to fill his
shoes. (Anybody still remember Ross Biro? He left in part because of
the attitude expressed above. But I won't get into that now.) 

That's an entirely different argument altogether, and it's not
relevant to this discussion.

Linus is not just for the developers. It's not just for the users,
either. What some of us try to do is reach a middle ground between the
needs of the users and the needs of the developers. The name "Linux
Consortium" appears be to causing a rift there, and I strongly suggest
that you find a better name. Otherwise, neither users nor developers
are going to feel completely comfortable with the notion of the LC,
and that is retroactive to your intended purpose. 

mdw
-- 
"Do you want to be Finnish? Sure, we all do!"

------------------------------

From: hohndel@informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de (Dirk Hohndel)
Subject: Re: Linux counter: Usage growth of Linux
Date: 11 Dec 1993 09:04:47 GMT

Eckehard Stolz (stolz@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE) wrote:

: A comment I wanted to send from germany ! There are some people (Stefan Henze and
: M. Mueller - sorry, I have the book at home) who published a "Linux
: Anwenderhandbuch"

Close. It's Sebastian Hetze and Martin Mueller...

: And the second version is allready sold out !!!! In my favorite book-store, they
: sold 80 books alone ! So you can estimate, how many it has been all over germany
: ! (I think more than 4000)

Make this 8000+. The next version is due in January.

        Dirk

--
 _     _           _            _   _     |  Lehrstuhl Informatik I
| | | |_) |/  |_| | | |_| |\ | | | |_ |   |  Universitaet Wuerzburg
|_/ | | \ |\  | | |_| | | | \| |_/ |_ |_  |  Am Hubland, D-97074 Wuerzburg

------------------------------


** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **

The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:

    Internet: Linux-Misc-Request@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.misc) via:

    Internet: Linux-Misc@NEWS-DIGESTS.MIT.EDU

Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
    nic.funet.fi				pub/OS/Linux
    tsx-11.mit.edu				pub/linux
    sunsite.unc.edu				pub/Linux

End of Linux-Misc Digest
******************************
