Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #420
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:     Sun, 12 Dec 93 22:13:09 EST

Linux-Misc Digest #420, Volume #1                Sun, 12 Dec 93 22:13:09 EST

Contents:
  Re: The Great Linux Debate(s) (Bill C. Riemers)
  ld.so, where is it? (Kendall Beaman)
  Trident 8900CL and 1024x768 256 Resolution (Kendall Beaman)
  Re: Debate: Time to Remove SLS From archive sites? (Chuck Fee)
  Re: Linux Consortium (Mark Line)
  Re: Linux Consortium .. NOT! (Mark Line)
  Re: LGX List of Problems #5 (Adam J. Richter)
  Re: Linux Consortium (Matt Welsh)
  Re: Yet another benchmark results.. (Carl Boernecke)
  Re: Linux counter: Usage growth of Linux (Brandon S. Allbery)
  Networking problems with pl14 (Paul Tomblin)
  Re: Debate: Time to Remove SLS From archive sites? (Michael A Iverson)
  Re: Yet another benchmark results.. (Matthew Dillon)

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

From: bcr@bohr.physics.purdue.edu (Bill C. Riemers)
Subject: Re: The Great Linux Debate(s)
Date: 12 Dec 93 18:15:21 GMT

In article <1993Dec12.023514.25870@henson.cc.wwu.edu> markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Mark Line) writes:
>I hope you realize that you've ostracized yourself from the Real Linux
>Community forever by using "Linux" in the name of your group without
>their blessing. Or were you able to get their blessing? How? Tell me,
>tell me!!!

Is there really such a "group"?  If so why do I care?  As near as I can
tell the Linux community is just anyone using Linux.  So the only way to
ever get an "official" blessing, would be to convince Linus to add a
patch to the kernel, that requires official voting on new usages for
the word "Linux" everytime you reboot.  (I don't think so.)  So if
you want to use "Linux" for the name of some group go for it...  Naturally
as with anything some people will complain, some will be overjoyed, and
most Linux users probably won't care one way or the other.  So I'm now
pleased to announce:

  The first every "Linux sex line."  Thats right just call:

      1-900-LINUXXX  (lots of money per minuit)

Yes that's right call now and recieve hours of entertainment from Bimbo's
that will actually be impressed with whatever you know about Linux.

Yes, while these 486 fast women might be a little short in the memory
department, they are increadably turned on by Linux with a large hard
disk.  No Linux system is complete without the proper software.

                               Bill


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

From: beaman@andrews.edu (Kendall Beaman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: ld.so, where is it?
Date: 13 Dec 1993 00:13:33 GMT

   Ok.  I've been messing with Linux and decided to change my shell.  I like
ksh better that the others so I got it and untarred it.  I can now no longer
log in as root.  Each time I get a error telling me that it can't load the
dynamic linker ld.so.  I logged in as one of my users and searched for it but
didn't find it.  How can I fix it if I can't log in as root?  
-- 
==============================================================================
I don't mind what Congress does, as long as they don't do it in the
streets and frighten the horses.    -- Victor Hugo
                                                        beaman@andrews.edu

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

From: beaman@andrews.edu (Kendall Beaman)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.help
Subject: Trident 8900CL and 1024x768 256 Resolution
Date: 13 Dec 1993 00:27:18 GMT

    Sorry if this is in a FAQ somewhere but I didn't see it in my copy.  I
have the Trident 8900CL and wanted to get 1024x768x256 in X-Windows.  I
have 8 megs of memory but don't run any swap.  What do I need to get this
resolution.  I can get 800x600 easily but when I try the higher one it locks
up on me.  Should I be running a swap file/partition?  HELP!!
-- 
==============================================================================
I don't mind what Congress does, as long as they don't do it in the
streets and frighten the horses.    -- Victor Hugo
                                                        beaman@andrews.edu

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

From: fee@cxf111.rh.psu.edu (Chuck Fee)
Subject: Re: Debate: Time to Remove SLS From archive sites?
Date: 13 Dec 1993 00:42:56 GMT

Bill C. Riemers (bcr@bohr.physics.purdue.edu) wrote:
: I for one would be opposed to this, unless Peter where to request this
: action himself.  

I too would love to hear his opinion in this matter, but alas,
I think he is gone.

: While true the code in SLS 1.03 is getting old, it still
: works today as well as the day Peter uploaded it.  

that's the whole problem! It didn't work right 5 months ago, and
it hasn't been fixed. Hell, when I ftp to tsx-11.mit.edu,
the banner when you cd into /pub/linux mentions SLS!! This
is the problem. we still seem to be pushing braindead software
on the unsuspecting masses. as I suggested, I think at the very
least that some sort of warning message should be posted to the
SLS distribution directory explaining that the distribution is
no longer activley maintained, and that if you post to c.o.l.*
and mention you are using SLS 1.03 you will not get any help,
and will in all likelihood be ignored or flamed.

: I do however recommend that ftp sites with limited disk space regularly 
: make hard descisions about what to keep on thier ftp sites.  What may be 
: the best uptodate distribution this month may well be second rate next 
: month, and might again be the best 3 months from now...

This I cannot agree to. If a linux distribution is out of date today, in
3 months it will be totally useless. Linux moves too damn fast. Of 
course, if you mean that another version of the distribution pops
up, then of course this could be true. Nobody is suggestioning
deleting actively maintained distributions. The problem is that
SLS 1.03 is old, does not work, developers despise it, its maintainer
has abondoned it, it is no longer gpl'd, and is still with us

Perfectly good distributions like MCC, Slackware and TAMU are not
being used because people are still using SLS, and probably getting
turned off to linux because of all the bugs, never knowing that their 
are a bunch of other distributions that have already fixed them, and 
months ago at that!. The *BSD people got rid of 386bsd 0.1 because
it was no longer being maintained, nobody in their right mind would
use it, and it was wasting disk space. I can't comment on the
disk space thing, since I've no idea how much space the respective
archives have, but I do think we share with the bsd folks that the
best thing to do for the community as a whole is to let the
old distributoins die a proper death and not let them become a 
source of ridicule.

--chuck

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

From: markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Mark Line)
Subject: Re: Linux Consortium
Date: 13 Dec 93 01:32:06 GMT

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

>In article <1993Dec12.071148.11487@henson.cc.wwu.edu> markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Mark Line) writes:
>>Two statements make me feel unwelcome. Yours, that LC supporters are a
>>bunch of technically incapable do-gooders running around like chickens
>>without heads, and Matt Welsh's, that only the Linux developers have a
>>say in what goes on in the Linux community.

>This is incorrect. I have said that Linux is not just for the
>developers. It's not just for the users, either.

No, you said that the developers would found an LC or nobody would.
That means that non-developer members of the Linux community are not
free to found an LC, nor (by implication in many other posted
statements) to do many other things. Users = impotent and unwanted,
that's what's been coming across.

>You have to
>find a middle ground between the two to get anything done. In
>particular claims of "officialdom" should come from the developers
>only, because they are the ones responsible for the software.

Does that mean the apparently official *distributors* have the
automatic sanction of the developers? Or did all the distributors
apply for sanction somewhere? Or are they equally unofficial? I
suspect that the distributors have done pretty much what they damn
well pleased, within the limitations of the GPL. But we've already had
that argument, and neither of us will convince the other now,
methings, as Magnus has already thrown in the towel.

>>No, my comment was in response to Matt Welsh's statement that
>>non-developers have no say in what goes on in the Linux community, 

>>Again, the statement from mdw was that people in the Linux community
>>can only do what the Linux developers agree to. 

>Both of the above statements are false. To save you the trouble, I'll
>quote my own text directly. I said,

>>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.) 

>Nowhere in here do I state or imply that the only decisions that can
>be made are by the developers. In fact, I say quite the opposite below:

>>Linus[sic, meaning Linux] 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.

>Wherein do I state that, in your words, that "only the Linux
>developers have a say in what goes on in the Linux community"? 

Nowhere in what you've quoted here. Those aren't the statements I was
quoting. This is what I took such offense about:

*****
>Very, very bad idea. Instead of attempting to create some falsely
>official organization with a slick look and no content, why don't you
>concentrate on an organization that will actually DO something useful
>for Linux, slick look or not? The existence of such an "official" LC
>is misleading in that it attempts to represent some kind of central
>organization which is "responsible" for Linux. No such organization
>exists, and you can't create an artificial one to serve the purpose.
>Either the Linux developers themselves create such an organization, or
>nobody does.
*****

What you have done here is both (a) claim that the LC wanted to
take on "responsibility" for Linux, which it never did (nor for XFree,
GhostScript, Emacs, or anything else included in the distributions
that the LC wanted to evaluate), and (b) state that nobody but the
developers could be allowed to form "such an organization". By "such
an organization you are referring to what you think the LC wanted to be
(even though it didn't), hence you are saying "either the Linux
developers themselves create [the LC], or nobody does". I'm sure I'm
not the only one who read this as such, and I'm sure I'm not the only
non-developer who took offense.

And I still think that anybody with access to an English dictionary
ought to able to stomach "Consortium" in the name -- that was your
primary bone of contention, it seems.

>Informally, people use the term ``Linux developers'' to mean
>well-known old hats like Linus, Lars, and the rest who have shaped
>Linux in some way or another. This is not a closed circle. It is more
>a question of seniority and influence than anything else. (NOTE: What
>follows is only a distillation of my own observations of how the Linux
>community appears to work. It's not a judgement or a rule. I'm not
>saying whether this is good or bad, I'm just pointing out that this is
>how things seems to currently work. That's how the cookie crumbles, as
>they say. :)) The point is simply that ``non-developers'' in general 
>don't do things that offend the ``developers''. That only causes
>problems as we've seen here.

I do things that offend people all the time, if I don't think it can
be avoided. The Germans have a saying something like, "Use a router,
and you get sawdust". The point is that there's a big group I didn't
offend, and a smaller group (the development clique) that I apparently
did offend, though that certainly wasn't my purpose. If developers
want to live in glass houses, that's their prerogative -- I don't even
see them throwing stones, not too much, anyway. If the developers'
feelings are hurt everytime the word Linux is used without official
sanction (which it is all that time) or everytime an organization is
formed within the greater Linux community without their sanction,
maybe they should grow thicker fur. Apart from mdw's comments, though,
I haven't heard from a single developer yet who was offended.

>If users don't like the direction that
>Linux is going in, feel free to ``work your way up the ladder'' by 
>contributing, but don't shove your way ahead in line.

Didn't somebody say that the Linux community *had* no ladder, had no
hierarchy, had a flat de-facto organization? I don't believe in the
authority of seniority -- that's one of the reasons I no longer work
at a multinational corporate headquarters. I only accept the authority
of good ideas. I still consider the LC a good idea, regardless of
name, and take offense at any attempts by developers to rein-in the
non-developing users. If you don't want users, why build software? Or
at least, why provide software to the public if you don't want users?

Perhaps most of you old-timers are still in the mindset of a group of
crack systems programmers creating a neat OS for your own use. That's
how things got started, no doubt -- with a group of one, to boot --
but that's simply not the situation now. The developers are going to
have to live with that situation, whether they continue developing or
not.

>Anyone can shape
>Linux, but the most productive way to do it is by respecting those who
>came before you. It may not be the best way, and not all parts of it
>are perfect, but that's how it seems to work now.

As I said, I don't respect seniority for the sake of seniority. I
have often had a better idea of what to do than people much senior to
myself -- most consultants do, or they wouldn't get any work. Whether
this is the case with the LC or not has no bearing on this -- the
future would have proven whether or not it was a good idea, not the
seniority of its detractors.

>I don't care to argue the point much further. Please e-mail me if you
>want to chat about it---I don't bite. :)

>I'm perfectly happy with the concept and name of "Linux Review Group"
>and the intended purpose. I plan to aid the LRG in writing the ``Linux
>Buyer's Guide'' which is primarily for folks who don't have network
>access. Not only with this promote Linux distributions, but it will
>include short reviews and "ratings" (taken via vote from the Linux
>community at large) of each distribution. Hopefully this friendly
>competition will work in Linux's favour.

>Are we all happy now?

Well, Lars isn't happy because you've given the beast a name. And
Andreas isn't happy, because he thinks who evaluate Linux
distributions just have too much time on their hands.

But, I'm happy, I think, for what it's worth. Time will tell.

-- 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: markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Mark Line)
Subject: Re: Linux Consortium .. NOT!
Date: 13 Dec 93 01:42:37 GMT

magnus@vipe.ii.uib.no (Magnus Y Alvestad) writes:

>In article <1993Dec12.071148.11487@henson.cc.wwu.edu> markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Mark Line) writes:

>       [a lot]

>Mr Line, I appreciate your support, but I would like to ask you to
>SHUT UP! And that goes for the rest of you as well. I'm getting a
>headache. There will be no Linux Consortium. Let the dog die.

**Note to readers: please imagine a white men's glove being slapped
across Magnus' face ...

I beg your pardon? Isn't this the same Magnus that shot the dog in the
first place? After picking it out of the litter right after birth?

I'm very sorry, but I don't think you can speak for the rest of us --
I've always tried not to speak for you. Even if you've given up on
any LC plans (under any name), that doesn't mean the rest of us have.

-- 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: adam@adam.yggdrasil.com (Adam J. Richter)
Subject: Re: LGX List of Problems #5
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 01:13:46 GMT

In article <1993Dec11.000838.7153@rosevax.rosemount.com>,
Grant Edwards <grante@hydro.rosemount.com> wrote:
>Adam J. Richter (adam@adam.yggdrasil.com) wrote:
>
>: > The LGX linux header files are different (and incompatible) with the
>: > pl13 kernel sources on sunsite.unc.edu.
>: [TOO VAGUE TO VERIFY.]
>
>If you like, I can send you a list of header files that are not the
>same as the those in the pl13 sunsite kernel sources.  I don't know
>that it matters -- the LGX headers are compatible with the LGX
>sources.  I assume there are differences because LGX contains an older
>version of pl13.

        What are you talking about?  There is no such thing as "an
older version of pl13."  If you are the author of this bug report,
what do you mean by "incompatible?"  The kernel distributed with LGX
has a number of additional device drivers, so there will be additions,
of course.  The only other improvement made in LGX that comes to
mind is the elimination of the i_dev field from the inode data structure,
which is designed to make it easier to implement certain types of
filesystems.  This necessitated a some minor changes to some file
cacheing routines, but that's about it.

-- 
Adam J. Richter                             Yggdrasil Computing, Incorporated
409 Evelyn Ave., Apt. 312, Albany CA 94706  4880 Stevens Creek Blvd., Suite 205
(510) 528-3209                              (408) 261-6630, fax: (408) 261-6631
adam@yggdrasil.com                          info@yggdrasil.som

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

From: mdw@cs.cornell.edu (Matt Welsh)
Subject: Re: Linux Consortium
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:10:26 GMT

In article <1993Dec13.013206.25078@henson.cc.wwu.edu> markline@henson.cc.wwu.edu (Mark Line) writes:
>>This is incorrect. I have said that Linux is not just for the
>>developers. It's not just for the users, either.
>
>No, you said that the developers would found an LC or nobody would.
>That means that non-developer members of the Linux community are not
>free to found an LC,

IF it is NAMED the "Linux Consortium", which appears to be a claim of
officialdom (which it is not, but the name is ambiguous). If it is
named the "Linux Review Group", I have no problems with non-developers
founding the organization, as long as they have background in Linux.
(We wouldn't want someone who doesn't know anything about Linux rating
the distributions, would we?) 

>Well, Lars isn't happy because you've given the beast a name. 

Yes; he feels that the LDP is too offical as well. I hate to hurt his
feelings, but he admittedly didn't speak up early on. :)

The point of this whole discussion should prove at least one thing:
Everyone has to make compromises. Those of us that are too stubborn
and closed to accept that should understand that the only reason Linux
made it this far was by compromise---compromise between many different
ways of doing things. This happens across the board, from kernel
development to creating newsgroups to forming organizations such as
the LRG. People have to be willing to bend in that sense---at first, I
was overtly opposed to the entire concept of the LRG but believe now
that it's workable, and I'm working with Magnus to contribute.

The moral of the story is: If you can't beat 'em, join 'em. 

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

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

Crossposted-To: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware,comp.os.vms,relcom.talk,relcom.fido.su.general
From: carlb@inex.com (Carl Boernecke)
Subject: Re: Yet another benchmark results..
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 01:06:47 GMT

tommy@zikzak.apana.org.au (Thomas Haywood) writes:
>I actually couldn't compile it.
>I got error messaged like this;
>unknown symbol _sin in bench.o
>unknown symbol _log in bench.o
>Plus for the other three maths functions.

Easy enough... you just need to include the math libraries.

>I'm using Slackware Linux 1.1.0.
>and compiled like this
>gcc -O6 -m486 -c bench.c
>gcc -O6 -m486 -o test bench.o

A line such as:  'gcc -O6 -m486 bench.c -o bench -lm' should do
the trick.

>My guess is that the maths functions are missing from my standard libraries.
>Any other reasons why this would happen?

Normally, things like math libraries, terminal/cursor libraries,
anything X-related, bsd-specific, etc, etc, etc, aren't included
so you need to add an appropriate '-l<libname>' to your compile
options.
-- 
-- Carl Boernecke (carlb@inex.com)
   "Time flies like an arrow... fruit flies like a banana."

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

From: bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery)
Subject: Re: Linux counter: Usage growth of Linux
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:03:59 GMT

In article <1993Dec12.225742.11591@inex.com>, carlb@inex.com (Carl Boernecke) says:
+---------------
| bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes:
| >I'm about to help a local bring up TAMU... and probably regret it, because
| >he knows nothing whatsoever about Unix but won't take my advice to slow down
| >and get an intro-to-Unix book; he wants to barrel forward at full speed :-(
| 
| Heh, I wish your friend good luck.  However, I'm sure they will
| meat a grisley end at the hands of UNIX.  :)  It's definately
+---------------

LILO met a grisly end at the hands of his video card... it's an old 8-bit (!)
Hercules-clone monochrome+EMS (!!) board; LILO prints "LILO Loading ramdisk.."
and the screen goes blank.  It finishes loading the kernel with no video, then
hangs.  We were unable to diagnose it...

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery         kf8nh@kf8nh.ampr.org          bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
"MSDOS didn't get as bad as it is overnight -- it took over ten years
of careful development."  ---dmeggins@aix1.uottawa.ca
Do not taunt Happy Fun Coder.   (seen on the Net...)

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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin
From: ab401@freenet.carleton.ca (Paul Tomblin)
Subject: Networking problems with pl14
Reply-To: ab401@freenet.carleton.ca
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 02:30:45 GMT

I've got a network of 10 or so linux boxes at work, all of whom are 
multi-homed.  They have two ethernet cards, one for talking to the corporate 
network, and another for talking to a network under test.  (The linux boxes 
are part of an automated network testing tool).  All but one of these 
machines is running SLS 1.0.3 with a pl12 kernal, and everything works fine.  
I tried upgrading one of the machines to a pl14 kernal.  I grabbed the new 
sources for /usr/src/linux, found the appropriate places to hard code the 
address and IRQ values for the two ethernet cards (in 
/usr/src/linux/drivers/net/Space.c), remade the kernal, and rebooted.  When 
it comes up, it seems to boot ok (the ifconfig and route commands in 
/etc/rc.net don't time out or give any visible errors).  But the nfs mounts 
in /etc/fstab time out.  And sure enough, I can't talk to either net.  I do 
an ifconfig, and it shows the same things it did under pl12 
(BROADCAST..RUNNING, all that stuff).  I do a "route", and it spits out two 
lines, and then hangs.  If I do a "route -n" (is that the right command?  
anyway, the one that doesn't look at the name server), it works.  But I can't 
ping anybody except myself, I can't telnet or rlogin or anything.  I didn't 
change anything in /etc/ between pl12 and pl14.  If I put back the old 
kernal, run /etc/lilo/lilo, and reboot, the networking works fine.

Has anybody else got multi-homed (more than one ethernet card) hosts working
under pl14?
--
Paul Tomblin, Head - Automated Test Tools Group, Gandalf Data Ltd.

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

From: miverson@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Michael A Iverson)
Subject: Re: Debate: Time to Remove SLS From archive sites?
Date: 13 Dec 1993 02:56:14 GMT

HERE is why SLS should be removed from the current list of FTP
sites, and, furthermore a Linux Review Group should be created
to rate the distributions and recommend suitability of various
distributions for various tasks:

I found this article posted tonight on Ohio State's local Linux
newsgroup. (I tried to help this poor soul as much as possible.
I'm sure he'd appreciate any further help you could give him.)

Clearly, there are potential users who are being alienated
by the continued impression that SLS is the premier Linux
distribution. AT LEAST I feel that a warning should be given
regarding the state of SLS. (At least he has access to the net
for help...)

>From dmsteven Sun Dec 12 21:39:49 EST 1993
>Article: 54 of osu.sys.linux
>Path: magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!dmsteven
>From: dmsteven@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Doug Stevenson)
>Newsgroups: osu.sys.linux
>Subject: Getting the whole damn linux thing to work
>Date: 13 Dec 1993 01:50:35 GMT
>Organization: The Ohio State University
>Lines: 29
>Message-ID: <2eghpb$6hq@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
>NNTP-Posting-Host: magnusug.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
>
>Well, after many MANY hours of frustration, I have have come to the
>conclusion that I just can't install linux on this machine!  Here's what
>I got (here at osu directly connected to the net):
>
>Gateway 486DX/33
>ATI VGA card
>Both an HPLAN and a WD8013 networking cards
>the latest version of Linux SLS installation
>
>Both of those network cards should be no-problem installation jobs, but
>I can just barely get the Western digital to work.  All it can do is
>telnet to itself.  It will NOT create routing tables for some reason.  I
>get the complaint that it can't find routing tables at /proc/net/route.
>In fact, there is NOTHING in the /proc directoy!  The rc initialization and
>the files associated were FAR beyond anything working.  I had to do some
>major tweaking on my part to get ANYTHING to work (such as telnetting to
>itself).  Almost all of the FAQs and information files tell me DIFFERENT
>things!  I have read almost everything I can get my hands on....twice.
>
>Also, I can't get color Xwindows to work.  XF86_Mono works fine (other than
>doing nothing when I get there) but the color version complains about
>finding no screens.
>
>If /anyone/ can help me out, it would save me hours of frustration
>and free me up so I can get some real work done!
>
>E-mail only please, I don't read these newsgroups much!  Thanks!
>
>Doug
>
-- 
****__Michael Iverson___________________________****
 ****__iverson@ee.eng.ohio-state.edu_____________****
  ****__The Department of Electrical Engineering__****
   ****__The Ohio State University_________________****

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

From: dillon@apollo.west.oic.com (Matthew Dillon)
Subject: Re: Yet another benchmark results..
Date: 11 Dec 1993 16:01:15 -0800

:n article <2e4nl7$ifo@wick.chemeng.ed.ac.uk> martin@chemeng.ed.ac.uk (Martin Spenceley) writes:
:
:>>In article 16788@pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu, viznyuk@mps.ohio-state.edu (Dragon Fly) writes:
:>
:>>>     Computer                             Time spent
:>>>
:>>>486DX2-66 EISA/VL 16Mb RAM
:>>>running Linux (Slackware 1.1.0).
:>>>gcc compiler.
:>>>Single user                               27 sec.
:>>>
:>>>SUN Sparc-2 with >= 16 Mb RAM
:>>>running SunOS
:>>>Single user                               69 sec.
>
>>DECstation 5200, 48 MB RAM, Ultrix
>>gcc, a few users                             28 sec.
>
>>DECstation 5240, 128 MB RAM, Ultrix
>>gcc, single user                             19 sec.

HP-UX A.09.01 E 9000/755
cc -O -lm, load of 2.32                         10 sec

    I'll tell you how fast it is with nobody on later tonight...

                                        -Matt


    Matthew Dillon              dillon@apollo.west.oic.com
    1005 Apollo Way
    Incline Village, NV. 89451  ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop)
    USA                         Sandel-Avery Engineering (702)831-8000
    [always include a portion of the original email in any response!]

-- 

    Matthew Dillon              dillon@apollo.west.oic.com
    1005 Apollo Way
    Incline Village, NV. 89451  ham: KC6LVW (no mail drop)
    USA                         Sandel-Avery Engineering (702)831-8000
    [always include a portion of the original email in any response!]


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


** 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
******************************
