Subject: Linux-Misc Digest #892
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:     Tue, 29 Mar 94 09:17:32 EST

Linux-Misc Digest #892, Volume #1                Tue, 29 Mar 94 09:17:32 EST

Contents:
  Re: Wine status March 11, 1994 (Richard L. Goerwitz)
  Re: c.o.l.x and automatic mod (Byron A Jeff)
  Re: Orchid Soundwave 32... (-- Forrest Pan --)
  Re: Impressions: FreeBSD vs Linux (Brant Katkansky)
  Re: STRAW POLL RESULT: Li (Rick Emerson)
  Re: The Keyword Debate Continues (Byron A Jeff)
  Re: STRAW POLL RESULT: Li (Kai Henningsen)
  Re: STRAW POLL RESULT: Li (Kai Henningsen)
  WYSYWIG Doc32 prog for X (William A Braun)
  Re: STRAW POLL RESULT: Linux groups automonitoring (Byron A Jeff)
  How to execute SCO binaries ??? (Oliver Wurm)

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

Crossposted-To: comp.windows.x.i386unix,comp.os.386bsd.apps
From: goer@quads.uchicago.edu (Richard L. Goerwitz)
Subject: Re: Wine status March 11, 1994
Reply-To: goer@midway.uchicago.edu
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 1994 03:36:47 GMT

pierre@mksinfo.qc.ca (Pierre Benard) writes:

>I think MS is starting to feel the pressure of Wine....

You must be joking.  I doubt they've even heard of it.

-- 

   -Richard L. Goerwitz              goer%midway@uchicago.bitnet
   goer@midway.uchicago.edu          rutgers!oddjob!ellis!goer

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

From: byron@cc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff)
Subject: Re: c.o.l.x and automatic mod
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 1994 03:54:55 GMT

In article <1.6391.2381.0N27C1F0@dscmail.com>,
Rick Emerson <rick.emerson@dscmail.com> wrote:
> @SUBJECT:c.o.l.x and automatic moderation         

[A very well reasoned out discussion. Parts deleted.]

>
>Several posters have already made the point that their requirements or
>expectations from the list cannot be met by any "AI" process.
>Furthermore, the groups' definition of "acceptable mail" will be
>driven by the person or group operating the moderation system and not
>the readership at large.  Those who fail to see the danger in this
>situation are invited to review the history of totalitarian systems.
>
>The automatic moderation scheme imposes a distinctly elitist feel to
>c.o.l.x; get a message wrong and get a warning from The Moderator.
>There are problems with the current state of the groups but they are
>created by the readership as a whole and it is the readership's
>responsibility to resolve these problems without resorting to
>automatic moderation.  Automatic moderation is antithetical to the
>spirit of Linux and free software.

Like I said a well reasoned argument. However I'd like to add that we may
be taking a myopic view of the situation. While it is true that in general
that moderation is undesirable, I think there are some situations where
it could be helpful:

- help has much signal to noise due to oft repeated FAQ and a zillion
  of the same response for each question. Both of these things hinder
  the process for which the group was created: to dispense help.
 
- Much of the time posters will post anywhere in the hierachy without
  thinking through why they are posting. In misc this is forgivable
  however in the others it causes all kinds of commotion.

I think we need to start expanding the scope of why each group exists
and tailor whatever structure is necessary in order to accomdate that
scope. This should include moderation.

I'll take a stab at a taxonomy: serious .vs fluff.

serious: a serious group is for discussions that forward the progess of
         Linux as an OS force and provide critical resources (information)
         to users that use Linux to perform real work.
fluff  : a fluff group is for freeform discussion of any topic that's
         remotely tied to Linux and it's use. Essentially a talk group.

Given that rough draft here's how current and future groups break down.

serious: help, development, admin, announce
fluff:   misc, advocacy

The serious groups (especially help) needs imposed structure in the form of
moderation. The structure should help keep noise out, keep discussions
focused, and point folks to the information they need, hopefully without
generating unnecessary FAQ and repeat posts. These groups should be backed
up by other mechanisms for getting information offline such as Mosiac home
pages, custom finger daemons, ftp sites, and email servers. They should
clearly point propective users to the sources of info (which are often
sitting right on the machine they're using. Slackware packages all the
HowTo's in the distribution) and ask that they read before posting.

The fluff groups need no structure. They should be unmoderated and unhindered.

My personal opinion is that admin and development never reached their intended
potential. They really are glorified help/misc groups. I'd personally delete
them. but...

I don't think my personal opinion should be policy either. Deleting admin,
development and moderating help would deprive posters of their current
priveledges. So My initial structure would probably be alongs the lines of:

serious: mod.help [mod.]announce
fluff: [talk.]misc [talk.]admin [talk.]development talk.advocacy [talk.]help

where the mod and talk keywords indicate the type of newsgroup it is. I'd
probably later on rmgrp admin and development and leave talk.help for
folks who refuse to use mod.help (where all the heavy hitters will actually
be)

As much as I hate to admit it, we need a playpen for some groups. This means
moderation. Not to make it elitist, just to make it manageable. The end result
is better educated users asking questions and discussing topics. Isn't that
better for us all?

BAJ
---
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel!
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332   Internet: byron@cc.gatech.edu

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

From: ez033547@renoir.ucdavis.edu (-- Forrest Pan --)
Subject: Re: Orchid Soundwave 32...
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1994 20:57:25 GMT

Eduardo Correia (ecorreia@san-patricio.cs.nmsu.edu) wrote:

> Hello,

>       I am currently in the process of buying an Orchid SoundWave 32
> soundboard for my PC... As anyone been able to use it with Linux ???
> Is any driver available ???

Use the DOS driver to boot your computer, then boot Linux. In Linux,
just use the Soundblaster driver. However, you won't be able to play
MIDI under Linux.

--Forrest


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

Crossposted-To: comp.os.386bsd.misc
From: brantk@atlas.com (Brant Katkansky)
Subject: Re: Impressions: FreeBSD vs Linux
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 1994 12:06:48 GMT

In article <Cn1yJz.LHI@hippo.ru.ac.za> csgr@cs.ru.ac.za writes:
>In <CMzw69.92K@tower.nullnet.fi> elandal@tower.nullnet.fi (Ismo Peltonen) writes:
>
>>What do people mean with this (`looks and feels like a beta/not finished')?
>>What in Linux makes that unfinished look'n'feel?
>
>>(The thing I most would like to see now is different keymaps/fonts on
>> different multiscreens, but I can well live without. If nothing comes
>> out, I'll probably hack something that satisfies me.)
>
>>I have yet to try new things with linux (I have hard time trying to keep
>>up with updates - last time I got route-binary I noticed I'd better
>>update my libs, which lead to downloading about 7 megs, some installing,
>>some compiling, and cursing for not to having yet changed my system to
>>conform to FSSTND), but whatever I've compiled has been fairly easy. Of
>>course having had Xenix before might have some influence in that
>>(anything on Xenix was a major headache).
>
>In my opinion, one of the big advantages of FreeBSD (and NetBSD) is the
>availability of a complete (controlled) source tree for the operating
>system.  (A tree that can be found in one place, and which can be
>installed easily.)  All that needs to be done to install new stuff is
>a "make world".  (As far as I can gather there is no complete
>maintained source tree for Linux.)
>
That's one point I was referring to.  Although a lot of the complaints I have about
Linux are not Linux problems per se, but problems with the distribution.  It seems
that the desinger couldn't decide whether to put stuff in /usr or /var, among
other things.  This results in a lot of symlinks which, to me, does not appear
like a "finished product".  Lack of a unified source tree was a major headache.

Don't get me wrong.  I like Linux, and I like it a lot.  I think within a year,
it'll get better and more consistant.  At the present time, though, I think I
am leaning towards FreeBSD.  It does lack some of the bells and whistles that
Linux has, but I can live with that.`


-- 
brantk@atlas.com | "Electricity is made up of very small particles called
Atlas Telecom    |  electrons, which you cannot see unless you have been
Portland, OR     |  drinking."
       --- This message printed with 100% recycled electrons ---

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

Subject: Re: STRAW POLL RESULT: Li
From: rick.emerson@dscmail.com (Rick Emerson)
Date: Mon, 28 Mar 94 20:10:00 -0640

 @SUBJECT:Re: STRAW POLL RESULT: Linux groups automonitoring          N
PI> Message-ID: <CnD3q5.DqC@unix.portal.com>
PI> Newsgroup: comp.os.linux.misc
PI> From: pierre@shell.portal.com (Pierre Uszynski)
PI> Organization: Portal Communications Company
PI> 
PI> In <1994Mar24.033845.25496@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> dlj0@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (DAV
PI> JOHNSON) writes:
PI> 
PI> >I thought this was a bad idea when I first read it, and I still do.  How
PI> >it seems to ahve changed from what I read -- and voted about.  You were 
PI> >to auto-reject every first post -- however you defined that.  Is that st
PI> >part of the scheme?
PI> 
PI> No, it is not. You still remember the original RFD. You even misunderstoo
PI> the original RFD. There has never been any "auto-reject the first post".
PI> And you apparently voted without even reading the ballot ;-) 
PI> 
PI> Once again, everybody together...

"Include me out!"  -- S. Goldwyn

PI> "NOBODY IS PUSHING FOR MODERATION OF ANY CURRENT COL GROUP. MONITORING
PI> (NOT MODERATION) IS WHEN A PROGRAM READS THE NEWSGROUP, LIKE YOU DO,
PI> AND EMAILS TO SOME POSTERS."    GET IT?

This is a semantic dance.  By *your* definition, an engine that mails
a notice saying a poster failed to include something in a post is
"monitoring" (sic).  "Moderation" in the newsgroup context is usually
taken to mean some form of direct intervention in the post
distribution process (mail to address, moderator [usually human]
comments, approves, rejects, or alters and forwards to list).  Because
the proposed scheme approximates part of the moderation process (i.e.,
comments), the term "moderation" or (my preference) "auto-moderation"
has been used.  But it's not the name that matters!  What matters is
the presumption of installing a system that sends "your mail is not up
to c.o.l.x standards" to people who may have no idea what that
standard may be.  *That* is the basis of the objection, not a label or
word choice.

PI> ahem... sorry... :-)
PI> 
PI> >Before you go ahead with this you really have to have an official vote, 
PI> >these newsgroups, not just a straw poll on news.groups.  A straw poll is
PI> >just that, a way to see if there is enough support to put a plan togethe
PI> >a real vote.  
PI> 
PI> A straw poll is to get an idea of how much support or opposition a
PI> proposal has. That's exactly what this one achieved. The proposal you
PI> voted on never required a formal vote, even the straw poll was not
PI> required. This proposal is a private initiative that happens to have
PI> a lot of supporters (and quite a bunch of vocal opponents.) As for

Some say "a lot of supporters [for non-intervention] (and quite a
bunch of vocal opponents)"...

PI> holding discussions in news.groups, that's the usual place to have them.
PI> All the proposals and the call for the straw poll were cross-posted to
PI> the col groups, as usual too.
PI> 
PI> >Before you do this, at least tell us what all we voted for.  
PI> 
PI> Well, make sure you read the proposal (included in the ballot) next
PI> time you vote,

Ignorance is, indeed, its own price.

PI> Pierre Uszynski.
PI> pierre@shell.portal.com
PI> 

Rick  
...
 * ATP/Linux 1.42 * Survival - the race between education and catastrophe


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

From: byron@cc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff)
Subject: Re: The Keyword Debate Continues
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 1994 04:28:46 GMT

In article <CnD4rF.KvB@unix.portal.com>,
Pierre Uszynski <pierre@shell.portal.com> wrote:
>In <RLJ.94Mar24120917@albion.rx.xerox.com> rlj@albion.rx.xerox.com (Richard L. Jones) writes:
>
>
>This was discussed in news.groups during the war on this proposal. The
>result is that:

We're still discussing. I'll take your point's one by one:

>
>1) It takes a long time to create a new newsgroup. 30 days discussion,
>30 days vote. So when the need for a new section arises, it's at least
>two months before it would have a forum. In opposition, adding a keyword
>is immediate. You don't have to wait for anything, you can start using
>it right away (and maybe get one mail each time you start a new thread,
>big deal, until the new keyword is globally accepted).

It does take a long time to create a newsgroup. However the need for more
newsgroups is clear. There is just too much traffic in the current groups
with more coming everyday. So let's get started so we can have them by summer.

>
>2) A quick look at how many keywords would be useful in col.help shows
>over 30 of them. col.help is a logical newsgroup division, but splitting
>it in, say, only three next levels, would be difficult, and newsreaders
>are not equipped to deal with 30 closely related newsgroups.

We don't need 30 newsgroups. However we do need more than the one
cluttered mess we have now. In your defense however 30 newsgroups would
be a nightmare. I think we need two big general unmoderated groups
(misc and advocacy) and the rest should be specialized and moderated.
Leave the current groups alone, they'll fall into disuse and can then
be garbage collected ;-)

>
>3) Newbies would know less to which newsgroup to post. Right now, even
>choosing between 4 does not always succeed... using col.help, and then
>some approximate keyword would work quite nicely. Using col.help
>and no keyword would get you, by return mail, a helpful explanation
>on how to use the keywords, and maybe an answer from helpers who would
>specialize in helping the Real Newbie With No Keyword :-) Having
>to pick among 30 newsgroups would be much more difficult, and would
>generate tons of cross-posting (even comp.os.linux is still used,
>although it has been mostly abandoned long ago ).

I might even agree with that. However I'd like to see stricter control.
Reason: we really don't need to see that 5000th post on how to get NIS
working. Not only should the user get a friendly note, but his/her post
should be quitely put in file 13 (/dev/null). Posting the question doesn't
benefit the poster (because it doesn't get answered) and it doesn't benefit
us readers (because we've seen it for the 5000th time). 

>
>4) The set of keywords can be very wide. That is because ANYTHING is
>more informative than half of the current Subjects in col.help. A
>keyword can be chosen approximately, and among a big list, by the poster.
>It's the helpers who are interested in filtering, and who would
>spend the time to build filters (more complex as there are more keywords).
>The current impression is to have keywords that are easy to choose,
>even if they are a bit more difficult to filter. Most of the headache
>actually is on the helpers who will use the filtering scheme, not on
>the newbies.
>
>Again, the goal in col.help is to allow more helpers to scan only
>the questions that have a chance to be in their field of interest. So
>that more newbies and pros alike can get competent answers.

No I think we need to go further than this. Most of questions (not just
newbies) have published answers. The goal should be to put the questioners
with the answers. We need to do this offline as much as possible. There's
already an Email server out. Matt has volunteered to put summaries in a
HTML home page. I'd like to see custom finger servers dispensing info.
I might even work on it if my advisor doesn't kick my butt first.

The help newsgroup needs not only organization, but also a culling of the
repetitive, often answer questions. The simple way to do this is not only
keywords (which is still needed for organizations' sake) but by asking the
poster to pay a small "usage fee". This Fee is simple: Show where in the
documentation your subject is. Show that you've read it. Show that your
answer really isn't there. Then will take your post.

Everyone would be informed. Help would look like a ghost town.

But this requires enforcement. And enforcement requires a new group. That group
must be moderated.  My belief is we put the two side by side and see which 
one's more effective. I'm no guru but I can guess which one.

Use the tags for now. Ask for voluntary usage. Leave off the email message.
Get a new group.

"CyberSpace is infinite - cut out your own niche! - me"

BAJ
---
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel!
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332   Internet: byron@cc.gatech.edu

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

Date: 29 Mar 1994 00:59:00 +0100
From: kai@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen)
Subject: Re: STRAW POLL RESULT: Li

rick.emerson@dscmail.com wrote on 25.03.94 in <1.6527.2381.0N27C22C@dscmail.com>:

MD>> What's a "massive waste of bandwidth"? Please explain yourself.

> Sending mail where it's neither required or needed seems to be a
> pretty fair definition.

Well then, obviously there is no massive waste involved here, as in the  
case the mail *is* sent, it's obviously required and needed.

> But the proposed scheme *does* impose moderation; step out of the

"Moderation"?! ROTFL.

> list or some groups, but it's more pressure than exists on most
> groups.

Certainly - and such pressure is obviously needed.


Kai
--
Internet: kh@ms.maus.de, kai@khms.westfalen.de
Bang: major_backbone!{ms.maus.de!kh,khms.westfalen.de!kai}
## CrossPoint v2.93 ##

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

Date: 29 Mar 1994 01:04:00 +0100
From: kai@khms.westfalen.de (Kai Henningsen)
Subject: Re: STRAW POLL RESULT: Li

rick.emerson@dscmail.com wrote on 25.03.94 in <1.6536.2381.0N27C22D@dscmail.com>:

> Well, how much does the VAT add to any one purchase?  It's not really
> that much is it?  QED

Yep, it really isn't much. (And in case you wondered, hereabouts it's 15%  
on most goods.)

However, while I can't avoid VAT (even if it's not much), I *can* avoid  
mail from the automonitor without loosing *anything*.

By the way, I *do* pay for my mail.

Kai
--
Internet: kh@ms.maus.de, kai@khms.westfalen.de
Bang: major_backbone!{ms.maus.de!kh,khms.westfalen.de!kai}
## CrossPoint v2.93 ##

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

From: wab@cs.pdx.edu (William A Braun)
Subject: WYSYWIG Doc32 prog for X
Date: 28 Mar 1994 15:09:43 -0800

When I try to use the WYSIWIG Doc32 program I get the following error...

Undefined C library functions
     1. light C shared image (Use the real one instead.)

CAn somebody tell me what this means and how I can get it to work.
Thanks in advance!


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

Crossposted-To: news.groups
From: byron@cc.gatech.edu (Byron A Jeff)
Subject: Re: STRAW POLL RESULT: Linux groups automonitoring
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 1994 05:08:49 GMT

In article <2n4fen$msq@nz12.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de>,
Thomas Koenig <ig25@fg30.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de> wrote:
>Byron A Jeff (byron@cc.gatech.edu) wrote in article <1994Mar27.171805.14263@cc.gatech.edu>:
>>A moderated newsgroup whose
>>charter included the restrictions would pass without comment.
>
>Hmm... ok.  Do I hear you volunteer as moderator?

So someone is actually reading. Good.

The group would have a program moderator. Its job is to enforce the rules
of good conduct we establish. These include:

- Keywords on all subject lines.
- A password. These can be found in online versions of the documentation.
  This documentation will be available via WWW, finger daemon, ftp, and 
  ftpmail. They would change often (under program control) so that they
  couldn't be reused. They would be stripped from the post before they
  make it to the newsgroup. required for all posts. With a custom finger
  server it's likely that the password would change each time finger
  was executed. Obviously the documentation servers and the program
  moderator would have to work together.
- Special Editors. Those folks who actually answer the questions - the
  developers and documentation writers, would have special access passwords
  so they could reply to posts without having to lookup the password of
  the day/hour/minute. May limit them to certain topics (or not).
- Email and rejections: any post that doesn't meet the criteria will be
  rejected and not posted. The rejection will contain specific information
  about how to post and where the information the poster is probably looking
  for is.
- Posting limits. The charter should provide for limiting the number of
  post a (user,machine,site) can make. Probably would not need to be 
  implemented but could be if a particular place posts massive amounts
  of properly formatted but otherwise useless junk or other such abuses.
- Also the documentation would be posted here (without passwords of course).
  Along with instructions of where to look if you have more problems.

Note that the program moderator only checks for structure things (keyword
and proper password). It in no way shape or form examines content. Matt's
recipie for spinach souffle is safe ;-)

Ok now the process:
1 I have a question.
2 I look up the relavent documentation (a necessary first step) by using
  one of the tools I listed above. I find the subject, read it. I usually
  find the answer I'm looking for. If not get the password and move on.
3 Post with subject keyword and password gotten from the documentation.
4 If it's in proper format it gets posted. Acceptance email is optional
  and can be specified in the post. Don't know that the default should be.
5 If not in proper format the get an Email stating so. Email has correct
  procedure and pointers to documentation for folks who didn't look at
  it the first time.
6 People can reply either by Email and I'll summarize, Post (by looking up
  the documentation to get a password), or get responded to by a Special
  Editor (who can find my post easily because I have subject keywords).

The point I'm trying to make is that most folks will stop after step 2.
They look in the documentation and find the answer. We of course have an
obligation to index the documentation but the keywords will help immensely.

Now it's totalitarian. It's fascist. It's restrictive. I'll admit all of that.
But it'll cut out most of the FAQ's, multiple responses, and noise that
abound in the newsgroups becuase the cost of posting has risen above the
cost of looking it up. So what's left are properly formatted, real problems.
All done automatically.

The only 2 things about Ian's ideas that I disliked was that it was to be
implemented in a current group whose charter had no provision to do so.
Also I know that enforcement of rules is the only way to get it to work.
This moderated group would be chartered with all of this. It would sit along
side of c.o.l.help. It would assist c.o.l.help by providing a clean forum
to ask serious questions at the cost of taking a little time to research
before posting. I'd gladly take that time.

Let me know what you think,

BAJ
---
Another random extraction from the mental bit stream of...
Byron A. Jeff - PhD student operating in parallel!
Georgia Tech, Atlanta GA 30332   Internet: byron@cc.gatech.edu

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

From: owurm@k.mup.de (Oliver Wurm)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.admin,comp.os.linux.help,comp.os.linux.development
Subject: How to execute SCO binaries ???
Date: 28 Mar 1994 08:17:45 GMT

Hi everybody,

there is only one reason for us to run our SCO UNIX server under SCO UNIX:
We need some of the SCO-Programs installed there.
I've read some time ago in one of the comp.os.linux.??? Newsgroups about
an iBCS - Emulator, which is able to run the SCO binaries, but I can't find
it on the ftp servers (most of them are SunSITE-mirrors).

**PLEASE** mail me the name of a ftp server and the path to the iBCS stuff.

Thanks in advance,

Oliver Wurm                      \\\//
EMail: owurm@k.mup.de            (o o)
==============================ooO=(_)=Ooo======================
,   ,                        ,     ,   ,---,      ,
|\./|      ___   ___   _   _~|~   -+-  |---'_   _~|~  _   _   _
|   | |_| | | | | | | |_~ |  |_    '   |   |_| |  |_ | | |_~ |
____________________Unternehmensberatung GmbH__________________
Neue Weyerstrasse 6      Tel: +49 (221) 92404 227
D-50676 Koeln            Fax: +49 (221) 92404 199 (-33 from US)

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


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