f



Can Linux Survive the Beating it's Getting? The 2.6 Linux kernel doesn't even work!!!

SCO is suing Linus.  Microsoft is still number one.  Redhat Linux is
dumping the small business home user market and giving them
unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches.  Novell
bought out SuSE, and as we all know many Novell alumni are now at SCO.
 Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as SCO does with Linux.

Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
compiled the kernel using the following steps.

make xconfig
make bzImage
make modules
make modules_install

I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!

This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.   Thanks a lot
Linux advocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my computer.  The least
you guys can do is fix your 2.6 kernel so it actually works on the
SuSE distro.  I'm telling everyone I know it 2.6 is a machine killer,
and unless someone can show me that I did something wrong, this is the
worst performance I've seen of any software...even open source(which
is bad, but usually it at least runs!!).
0
mikecoxlinux (652)
11/16/2003 8:50:47 AM
comp.os.linux.advocacy 124139 articles. 3 followers. Post Follow

113 Replies
1039 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 52

Mike Cox wrote:

> SCO is suing Linus.  Microsoft is still number one.  Redhat Linux is
> dumping the small business home user market and giving them
> unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches.  Novell
> bought out SuSE, and as we all know many Novell alumni are now at SCO.
>  Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as SCO does with Linux.
> 
> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
> 
> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install
> 
> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
> 
> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.   Thanks a lot
> Linux advocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my computer.  The least
> you guys can do is fix your 2.6 kernel so it actually works on the
> SuSE distro.  I'm telling everyone I know it 2.6 is a machine killer,
> and unless someone can show me that I did something wrong, this is the
> worst performance I've seen of any software...even open source(which
> is bad, but usually it at least runs!!).

If you are unable to setup multiple kernels, you should not compile new
kernels. Simple as that. You should always have some fallback position.
And you still have. Boot with the CD, and from there boot "installed system"

Then move good kernel back. Done. Simple

Now you may tell us how to do same with windows. Be precise

And I forgot: Idiot
-- 
Just out of curiosity does this actually mean something or have some
of the few remaining bits of your brain just evaporated?

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/16/2003 9:13:17 AM
Mike Cox wrote:

> SCO is suing Linus.

No, SCO is NOT suing anyone but IBM at the moment.

> Microsoft is still number one.

Yeah, but they claim to be trying to improve their security (you
did mean #1 in exploitability, right?)

> Redhat Linux is dumping the small business home user market and
> giving them unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no 
> backward patches. 

BFD

> Novell bought out SuSE, and as we all know many Novell alumni
> are now at SCO. Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as 
> SCO does with Linux.

Considering SCO has done absolutely nothing to Linux, this seems
like a curious thing to worry about even if it made any sense
(which it doesn't).
 
> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am
> using SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was
> unsuccessful.

You're incompetence is not the same a Linux being hard to use.
And as you will note below, it WAS *your* incompetence.

> I compiled the kernel using the following steps.
> 
> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install
> 
> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it
> vmlinuz(my other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 
> 8.2, and I assumed I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 
> kernel failed to EVEN boot completely!!!  I got an error
> message stating the kernel couldn't mount hda3 (what ever that
> is)!!!
 
> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.   

That's because you're really, really stupid. If you had read the
excellent SuSE manual, you would have found this information on
p262-264 (for 8.2):

"To prevent unpleasant surprises, it is recommended that you keep
the old kernel (e.g, as /boot/vmlinuz.old), so you can still
boot it if the old kernel does not function as expected."

....

"To enable GRUB or LILO to boot the old kernel (now
/boot/vmlinuz.old), add an image entry with the label Linux.old
in your /boot/grub/menu.lst ..."

and finally the step you didn't do:

"... once you have compiled and installed the kernel, copy
/usr/src/linux/System.map to the directory (/boot) ..."

This is in the section labeled "Installing the Kernel". I suppose
with such a cryptic title, you probably missed that when you
were installing the kernel.



> Thanks a lot Linux advocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my
> computer.  The least you guys can do is fix your 2.6 kernel so
> it actually works on the SuSE distro.  I'm telling everyone I
> know it 2.6 is a machine killer, and unless someone can show me
> that I did something wrong, 

Obviously you did, Even if you hadn't though, I'd know you were
lying in the first place, because a default SuSE install
installs at least TWO copies of the kernel (check the menu when
you boot - there are several choices). vmlinuz.shipped (linked
to vmlinuz.suse) should still be there and bootable.


> this is the worst performance I've seen of any
> software...even open source(which is bad, but usually it at
> least runs!!).

Yeah, I'd take the opinion of an illiterate lying troll about
that.

Jim

0
jbublitzno (53)
11/16/2003 9:35:38 AM
Mike Cox wrote:


> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.

Just to follow up on my previous reply (the one where I said you
were "really, really stupid" and that you were lying) - the SuSE
CD set is bootable (so you can use it as a rescue disk and fix
your problem that way), and you could simply reinstall (as an
upgrade) the original 2.4 kernel and then try the 2.6 kernel
install again. 

See, I was right.

Jim
0
jbublitzno (53)
11/16/2003 9:41:44 AM
Mike Cox wrote:
> SCO is suing Linus.  

SCO 'subpoenad' Linus.   Subpoena, see it starts with the
letter 's' just like suing, but it's longer and has a different
meaning.

> Microsoft is still number one. 

Really?  Go to netcraft and see which OS/web server
combo has led the pack forever and is increasing.
> 
> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.

how many steps did it take you to compile
the XP kernel?  and how long did it take?

0
jabailo2 (6594)
11/16/2003 9:58:05 AM
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 09:35:38 GMT, Jim Bublitz
<jbublitzno@spamnwinternet.com> wrote:

>Mike Cox wrote:
>
>> SCO is suing Linus.
>
>No, SCO is NOT suing anyone but IBM at the moment.
>
More correctly SCO has issued Linus with a subpoena asking for
documents and information which SCO says they require in support of
their case against IBM.  Whether Linus actually has to cough up is
another matter - in my opinion, SCO has not put an ounce of evidence
on the table to support their claims and it is rapidly getting to be a
'put up' or 'shut up' case.  SCO seems to have blundered in that some
of the code they claim was 'stolen' is in fact very old code
effectively licensed both to SCO and for Linux use.  This blunder
seems to have knocked out the very foundation of their claims.

They are now hoping to 'discover' the evidence they need from IBM,
Linus etc.  However this is called 'fishing' and is a no-no.

Meanwhile, IBM's lawyers are going in for an early kill with ruthless
efficiency.  The case will probably be thrown out on its ear early in
the new year.

Watch out for the next enthralling episode on:
http://www.groklaw.net


0
peterwn (676)
11/16/2003 10:12:44 AM
Mike Cox wrote:

> SCO is suing Linus.  Microsoft is still number one.  Redhat Linux is
> dumping the small business home user market and giving them
> unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches.  Novell
> bought out SuSE, and as we all know many Novell alumni are now at SCO.
>  Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as SCO does with Linux.
> 
> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
> 
> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install
> 
> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
If you don't know what that is you should not be compiling a kernel.

> 
> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.   Thanks a lot
> Linux advocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my computer.  The least
> you guys can do is fix your 2.6 kernel so it actually works on the
> SuSE distro.  I'm telling everyone I know it 2.6 is a machine killer,
> and unless someone can show me that I did something wrong, this is the
> worst performance I've seen of any software...even open source(which
> is bad, but usually it at least runs!!).
You should have added an entry in your lilo/grub config file, for the new
kernel and moved the bzImage to vmlinuz_new. Then you could boot to your
old kernel if 2.6 didnt work.  I have 2.6 test 9 and it works.  Everything
seems faster.

-- 
Thanks
        Yorker
0
yorker (8)
11/16/2003 10:29:26 AM
Yorker wrote:
> Mike Cox wrote:
> 
> You should have added an entry in your lilo/grub config file, for the new
> kernel and moved the bzImage to vmlinuz_new. Then you could boot to your
> old kernel if 2.6 didnt work.  I have 2.6 test 9 and it works.  Everything
> seems faster.
> 

Save your breath.

This is the type of moron who
would try to adjust the belt
on the alternator in his car,
and when he fucks it up and it
doesn't work, then he would
say that GM cars are poorly
designed and Honda is great...
thus linking his trivial inadequacies
to something greater...sure
sign of an Inferiority Complex.




0
jabailo2 (6594)
11/16/2003 10:36:06 AM
begin  <3d6111f1.0311160050.e6cda13@posting.google.com>,
	mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com (Mike Cox) writes:
> 
> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
> 
> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install

So you can't even be bothered to read the documentation. Tell me,
where does it tell you to 'make modules; make modules_install'
when building a 2.6 kernel?

> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
> 
> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.

It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid
to understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.
0
rgc (750)
11/16/2003 11:21:38 AM
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 00:50:47 -0800, Mike Cox wrote:

> SCO is suing Linus.  

Reference, please.

> Microsoft is still number one.  

.... number one Federal lawbreaker.

> Redhat Linux is dumping the small business home user market

Bzzt. Wrong. Try again. They may starting a questionable policy, but you
can still obtain RH EL WS for $179 ($50 Education)

> and giving them unsupported
> beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches.

Just as RH was unsupported if you didn't pay.

> Novell bought out SuSE,
> and as we all know many Novell alumni are now at SCO.
>  Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as SCO does with Linux.

How do you know this? Crystal ball? You haven't been right so far.

> 
> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use. 

Linux isn't hard for normal people to use.

> I am using SuSE
> 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I compiled
> the kernel using the following steps.

Why did you compile a kernel and why didn't -you- do it correctly. BTW,
when was the last time you compile a window$ kernel?

> 
> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install
> 
> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my other
> kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed I was
> done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't mount
> hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
> 
> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine. 

You should have compiled the kernel correctly.

>  Thanks a lot Linuxadvocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my computer.

You're a liar.

>  The least you guys can
> do is fix your 2.6 kernel so it actually works on the SuSE distro. 

You show your troll factor. When did 2.6 become a production kernel?

> I'm
> telling everyone I know it 2.6 is a machine killer, 

Everyone you know already knows you are a liar.

> and unless someone can
> show me that I did something wrong, this is the worst performance I've
> seen of any software...even open source(which is bad, but usually it at
> least runs!!).

Lying idiot troll.

-- 
Rick

0
rick83 (2468)
11/16/2003 11:48:04 AM
Rick wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 00:50:47 -0800, Mike Cox wrote:
> 
> 

> Why did you compile a kernel and why didn't -you- do it correctly. BTW,
> when was the last time you compile a window$ kernel?
> 
> 
>>make xconfig
>>make bzImage
>>make modules
>>make modules_install

i noticed that apt-get has a switch for
automatic compile of source code after
the download -- wonder if it would work
for kernel sources.


0
jabailo2 (6594)
11/16/2003 12:17:22 PM
Peter K�hlmann <Peter.Koehlmann@t-online.de> wrote:

>Mike Cox wrote:
>
>> SCO is suing Linus.  

No you idiot ... SCO sent Linus Torvalds a SUBPOENA.  That's a
loooooooooong way from having your name on the front page of a
legal filing in the place marked "Defendant". 

>> Redhat Linux is
>> dumping the small business home user market and giving them
>> unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches. 

And Mandrake (which has always been more of a user distro) is
right there to catch them. 


>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful. 

It appears you are unsuitable to use the TEST code.  Stick to the
packaged distros and you will be fine.  


>> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.   Thanks a lot
>> Linux advocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my computer.

No ... you failed to take adequate precautions when installing
TEST (the 2.6 test-9 kernel).  

Find your old distro CDS and reinstall over the top, booting from
the CDROM to do so.  It will be fine. 



Tsu Dho Nimh

-- 
When businesses invoke the "protection of consumers," it's a lot like 
politicians invoking morality and children - grab your wallet and/or 
your kid and run for your life.
0
tsudhonimh (45)
11/16/2003 1:02:16 PM
Mike Cox the Wintroll threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> SCO is suing Linus.  Microsoft is still number one.  Redhat Linux is
> dumping the small business home user market and giving them
> unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches.  Novell
> bought out SuSE, and as we all know many Novell alumni are now at SCO.
>  Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as SCO does with Linux.

You forgot to mention that "there have been rumours of war and
pestilence"!

> 
> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use. 

Nonsense.

> I am using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
> 
> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install

Oh no you didn't. The 2.6 kernel is compiled with a single make command
after the config, the whole build process is different and simpler.

Apart from the fact that you're a liar, why would a newbie like you try
and replace a stable kernel with a *test* kernel ?

Let's see you replace your Windows kernel, Wintroll!


-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/16/2003 1:40:10 PM
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 00:50:47 -0800, Mike Cox wrote:

> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.

Linux was hard for you because you unnecessarily attempted to install a
beta kernel. It's not fair to blame linux because you don't know what
you're doing and got yourself in trouble. If you're just an end user and
can't follow the directions, wait for SuSE to release a mainline 2.6
kernel that you can upgrade through YAST.

-- 
remove nospam. to reply

0
nobrac (13)
11/16/2003 3:15:44 PM
Roy Culley wrote:

> begin  <3d6111f1.0311160050.e6cda13@posting.google.com>,
> mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com (Mike Cox) writes:
>> 
>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>> 
>> make xconfig
>> make bzImage
>> make modules
>> make modules_install
> 
> So you can't even be bothered to read the documentation. Tell me,
> where does it tell you to 'make modules; make modules_install'
> when building a 2.6 kernel?
> 
>> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
>> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
>> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
>> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
>> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
>> 
>> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.
> 
> It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
> documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid
> to understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.

Well, he would have first, to even let his story be half-true, delete the
fail-safe kernel which is installed along the normal one.
Because that entry is always installed by SuSE by default for the 8.2
version. So if he can no longer boot, it is because he not only messed
around with things he doesn't know anything of (being the typical dumb as a
brick windows user), but also conciously deleted his second-last line of
defense should anything go wrong. Then he still would be able to boot via
CD.

In other words: Mike Cox has the choice between being a lying idiot or just
a plain windows using moron.
I'd vote for lying windows using idiot
-- 
Experience is what causes a person to make new mistakes instead of 
old ones.

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/16/2003 5:03:39 PM
Mike Cox wrote:

> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.��I�am�using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.��I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
> 
> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install
> 
> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
> other kernel was named this).��I�have�grub�on�SuSE�8.2,�and�I�assumed
> I was done.��Unfortunatly,�the�2.6-test9�kernel�failed�to�EVEN�boot
> completely!!!��I�got�an�error�message�stating�the�kernel�couldn't
> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!

If you don't know what hda3 is you sure as fuck shouldn't be installing
2.6......
0
autismuk (95)
11/16/2003 7:49:05 PM
Mike Cox wrote:

> SCO is suing Linus.  Microsoft is still number one.  Redhat Linux is
> dumping the small business home user market and giving them
> unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches.  Novell
> bought out SuSE, and as we all know many Novell alumni are now at SCO.
>  Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as SCO does with Linux.
> 
> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
> 
> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install
> 
> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
> 
> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.   Thanks a lot
> Linux advocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my computer.  The least
> you guys can do is fix your 2.6 kernel so it actually works on the
> SuSE distro.  I'm telling everyone I know it 2.6 is a machine killer,
> and unless someone can show me that I did something wrong, this is the
> worst performance I've seen of any software...even open source(which
> is bad, but usually it at least runs!!).


If you can't/won't read the provided documentation then you deserve all you
sufffer. Crawl back to that windows rock and slide your slimey arse under
it and GO AWAY... You deserve it.
-- 

******************************************************************************
                     Registered Linux User Number 185956
          http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&safe=off&group=linux
             Join me in chat at #linux-users on irc.freenode.net
This email account no longers accepts attachments or messages containing
html.
     3:43pm  up 46 days, 20:36,  7 users,  load average: 0.00, 0.07, 0.06
0
mcbrides92 (795)
11/16/2003 9:30:32 PM
The troll Mike Cocks wrote:

[...]

You're stupid.

-- 

[tv]



Microsoft software doesn't get released - it escapes,

leaving a trail of destruction behind it.
0
sitting1 (130)
11/16/2003 9:33:50 PM
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:21:38 +0100, Roy Culley wrote:
>> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.
> 
> It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
> documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid
> to understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.

There goes Roy again, advocating Linux by performing ad-hominem attacks on
people.

Clue for you Roy: He didn't insult you. He said that his situation sucks.
Please, learn the difference. It's not hard.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/16/2003 10:25:55 PM
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:03:39 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:

> Roy Culley wrote:
> 
>> begin  <3d6111f1.0311160050.e6cda13@posting.google.com>,
>> mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com (Mike Cox) writes:
>>> 
>>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>> 
>>> make xconfig
>>> make bzImage
>>> make modules
>>> make modules_install
>> 
>> So you can't even be bothered to read the documentation. Tell me,
>> where does it tell you to 'make modules; make modules_install'
>> when building a 2.6 kernel?
>> 
>>> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
>>> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
>>> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
>>> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
>>> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
>>> 
>>> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.
>> 
>> It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
>> documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid
>> to understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.
> 
> Well, he would have first, to even let his story be half-true, delete the
> fail-safe kernel which is installed along the normal one.
> Because that entry is always installed by SuSE by default for the 8.2
> version. So if he can no longer boot, it is because he not only messed
> around with things he doesn't know anything of (being the typical dumb as a
> brick windows user), but also conciously deleted his second-last line of
> defense should anything go wrong. Then he still would be able to boot via
> CD.
> 
> In other words: Mike Cox has the choice between being a lying idiot or just
> a plain windows using moron.
> I'd vote for lying windows using idiot

Yet another ad hominem attack brought to you by the Angry German, Peter
Kohlmann!

Let's put our hands together in a round of applause for his amazing Linux
Advocacy Skills! YAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!
0
fantastical (2319)
11/16/2003 10:26:42 PM
Milo T. wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:21:38 +0100, Roy Culley wrote:
>>> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.
>> 
>> It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
>> documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid
>> to understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.
> 
> There goes Roy again, advocating Linux by performing ad-hominem attacks on
> people.
> 
> Clue for you Roy: He didn't insult you. He said that his situation sucks.
> Please, learn the difference. It's not hard.

Nope. He told us that he is a stupid windows user. Which is just the normal
case so far.
What he told us is that his situation sucks. What he did not tell us is that
it sucks because he is a stupid windows user and behaved exactly like a
stupid windows user, that is, incredibly stupid

Was no difficult to dissect from his post, though
-- 
There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots.

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/16/2003 10:27:24 PM
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 23:27:24 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:

> Milo T. wrote:
> 
>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:21:38 +0100, Roy Culley wrote:
>>>> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.
>>> 
>>> It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
>>> documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid
>>> to understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.
>> 
>> There goes Roy again, advocating Linux by performing ad-hominem attacks on
>> people.
>> 
>> Clue for you Roy: He didn't insult you. He said that his situation sucks.
>> Please, learn the difference. It's not hard.
> 
> Nope. He told us that he is a stupid windows user. Which is just the normal
> case so far.
> What he told us is that his situation sucks. What he did not tell us is that
> it sucks because he is a stupid windows user and behaved exactly like a
> stupid windows user, that is, incredibly stupid
> 
> Was no difficult to dissect from his post, though

Yep. More ad hominem attacks. Attacking the poster, not the message.
Calling someone stupid when you really have no idea who that person is, or
whether they're stupid or not.

You need to grow up and learn how to behave in a social world. While this
is all grist for the mill on Usenet, in real life you'd be dead before you
could blink if you went around talking to everyone like this. Either that
or you'd be completely ostracized.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/16/2003 10:32:59 PM
Milo T. wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 23:27:24 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:
> 
>> Milo T. wrote:
>> 
>>> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:21:38 +0100, Roy Culley wrote:
>>>>> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.
>>>> 
>>>> It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
>>>> documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid
>>>> to understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.
>>> 
>>> There goes Roy again, advocating Linux by performing ad-hominem attacks
>>> on people.
>>> 
>>> Clue for you Roy: He didn't insult you. He said that his situation
>>> sucks. Please, learn the difference. It's not hard.
>> 
>> Nope. He told us that he is a stupid windows user. Which is just the
>> normal case so far.
>> What he told us is that his situation sucks. What he did not tell us is
>> that it sucks because he is a stupid windows user and behaved exactly
>> like a stupid windows user, that is, incredibly stupid
>> 
>> Was no difficult to dissect from his post, though
> 
> Yep. More ad hominem attacks. Attacking the poster, not the message.
> Calling someone stupid when you really have no idea who that person is, or
> whether they're stupid or not.
>
He had posted enough info to know exactly that he is incredibly dumb. Just a
standard windows user
 
> You need to grow up and learn how to behave in a social world. While this
> is all grist for the mill on Usenet, in real life you'd be dead before you
> could blink if you went around talking to everyone like this. Either that
> or you'd be completely ostracized.

Why are you describing your situation in the real world here, Simon?
-- 
The cost of living hasn't affected its popularity.

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/16/2003 10:38:40 PM
Milo T. wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:03:39 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:
> 
>> Roy Culley wrote:
>> 
>>> begin  <3d6111f1.0311160050.e6cda13@posting.google.com>,
>>> mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com (Mike Cox) writes:
>>>> 
>>>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>>>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>>> 
>>>> make xconfig
>>>> make bzImage
>>>> make modules
>>>> make modules_install
>>> 
>>> So you can't even be bothered to read the documentation. Tell me,
>>> where does it tell you to 'make modules; make modules_install'
>>> when building a 2.6 kernel?
>>> 
>>>> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
>>>> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
>>>> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
>>>> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
>>>> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
>>>> 
>>>> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.
>>> 
>>> It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
>>> documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid
>>> to understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.
>> 
>> Well, he would have first, to even let his story be half-true, delete the
>> fail-safe kernel which is installed along the normal one.
>> Because that entry is always installed by SuSE by default for the 8.2
>> version. So if he can no longer boot, it is because he not only messed
>> around with things he doesn't know anything of (being the typical dumb as
>> a brick windows user), but also conciously deleted his second-last line
>> of defense should anything go wrong. Then he still would be able to boot
>> via CD.
>> 
>> In other words: Mike Cox has the choice between being a lying idiot or
>> just a plain windows using moron.
>> I'd vote for lying windows using idiot
> 
> Yet another ad hominem attack brought to you by the Angry German, Peter
> Kohlmann!
> 
> Let's put our hands together in a round of applause for his amazing Linux
> Advocacy Skills! YAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!

Did you even bother to read *why* Mike Cox is an idiot? I guess not

-- 
It is very difficult to prophesy, especially when it pertains to the
future.

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/16/2003 10:40:18 PM
So anyway, it was like, 23:32 CET Nov 16 2003, you know? Oh, and, yeah,
Milo T. was all like, "Dude,

> You need to grow up and learn how to behave in a social world.

Not much for teaching by example, are you, Simon?

-- 
Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana.      Perth ---> *
 23:41:03 up 2 days, 23:02,  5 users,  load average: 2.93, 2.48, 2.30
$ cat /dev/bollocks                      Registered Linux user #261729
leverage collaborative platforms
0
spam7 (1369)
11/16/2003 10:42:41 PM
On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 22:26:42 +0000, Milo T. wrote:

> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:03:39 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:
> 
>> Roy Culley wrote:
>> 
>>> begin  <3d6111f1.0311160050.e6cda13@posting.google.com>,
>>> mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com (Mike Cox) writes:
>>>> 
>>>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>>>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>>> 
>>>> make xconfig
>>>> make bzImage
>>>> make modules
>>>> make modules_install
>>> 
>>> So you can't even be bothered to read the documentation. Tell me, where
>>> does it tell you to 'make modules; make modules_install' when building
>>> a 2.6 kernel?
>>> 
>>>> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
>>>> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
>>>> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
>>>> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
>>>> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
>>>> 
>>>> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.
>>> 
>>> It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
>>> documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid to
>>> understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.
>> 
>> Well, he would have first, to even let his story be half-true, delete
>> the fail-safe kernel which is installed along the normal one. Because
>> that entry is always installed by SuSE by default for the 8.2 version.
>> So if he can no longer boot, it is because he not only messed around
>> with things he doesn't know anything of (being the typical dumb as a
>> brick windows user), but also conciously deleted his second-last line of
>> defense should anything go wrong. Then he still would be able to boot
>> via CD.
>> 
>> In other words: Mike Cox has the choice between being a lying idiot or
>> just a plain windows using moron.
>> I'd vote for lying windows using idiot
> 
> Yet another ad hominem attack brought to you by the Angry German, Peter
> Kohlmann!
> 
> Let's put our hands together in a round of applause for his amazing Linux
> Advocacy Skills! YAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!

Schmuck
-- 
Rick

0
rick83 (2468)
11/16/2003 10:47:02 PM
begin  <14lknsig2qk9j$.skflczapmlih$@fanatastical.malaprop.net>,
	"Milo T." <fantastical@malaprop.net> writes:
> On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:21:38 +0100, Roy Culley wrote:
>>> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.
>> 
>> It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
>> documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid
>> to understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.
> 
> There goes Roy again, advocating Linux by performing ad-hominem attacks on
> people.
> 
> Clue for you Roy: He didn't insult you. He said that his situation
> sucks.  Please, learn the difference. It's not hard.

Grow up Cooke. The post was just FUD and lies. Of course I'm going to
take such a poster to task. Just like I do when you spread FUD and
lies. As you pointed out I am a Linux advocate. You and your fellow
wintrolls are the ones that disrupt this newsgroup. It provides great
entertainment for me. I haven't a clue what you get out of making an
arse of yourself at every opportunity.
0
rgc (750)
11/16/2003 11:02:38 PM
Johan Lindquist wrote:

> So anyway, it was like, 23:32 CET Nov 16 2003, you know? Oh, and,
> yeah, Milo T. was all like, "Dude,
> 
> > You need to grow up and learn how to behave in a social world.
> 
> Not much for teaching by example, are you, Simon?
> 
From the guy that called me a child fucker when I refered to him as 
Simon COoke.  Poor Simon COoke is not setting a very good example.

-- 
  4:05pm  up 35 days, 16:22,  1 user,  load average: 1.36, 1.49, 1.51
To email me, change .com to .ca   Linux Counter Registration #126647

0
11/16/2003 11:09:59 PM
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:02:38 +0100, Roy Culley wrote:
> I haven't a clue what you get out of making an
> arse of yourself at every opportunity.

You mean like when I pointed out that your fellow Linux Advocate Paul Cooke
was claiming that Linux had 9.5million percent of the desktop market?
0
fantastical (2319)
11/16/2003 11:54:46 PM
Fearing a spontaneous XP reboot, Mike Cox mumbled this incantation:

> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.   Thanks a lot
> Linux advocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my computer.

[Other gibbering and whining snipped]

You are a freakin' idiot, sir.

-- 
No, I won't fix your Windows computer!
0
iso
11/17/2003 2:52:59 AM
Mike Cox spilled his alphabet soup on the floor,
and the letters spelled:

> I'm telling everyone I know it 2.6 is a machine killer,

Linux morpheus 2.6.0-test9 #3 Fri Nov 14 16:23:18 CST 2003 i686 AMD
Athlon(tm) XP 2000+ AuthenticAMD GNU/Linux

I just upgraded this machine:
http://franoculator.ath.cx:8880/newdesk1.jpg

to test9 on Friday.  It has been running test5 for about a month.  No
trouble so far.  Oh, and those monitors are hooked up to nvidia cards
too.

Nice try, though.

-- 
*****  Matthew Powell  *******************************
******  http://www.franoculator.com  *****************
*******  Visit us on #cola on irc.oftc.net  **********
0
matt1629 (229)
11/17/2003 3:29:00 AM
mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com (Mike Cox) wrote in message news:<3d6111f1.0311160050.e6cda13@posting.google.com>...
[deletia]
> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
> 
> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install
> 
> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my

This contradicts your thesis. The fact is that it is remarkably
easy to shoot yourself in the foot. Your problems demonstrate 
this to be clearly the case.

It's quite easy: if the kernel that you create doesn't boot, 
then change your compile options (with the shiny happy tools)
and try again.

> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't

Well, if you're too stupid to maintain a fallback position that is
really not the fault of Linux. If you had not destroyed your old
kernel, your system would be perfectly bootable.

What you did is no different than  cp /dev/null /boot/vmlinuz.
No OS can really prevent you from doing idiotic things if you
are bound and determine to hurt yourself.

> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
> 
> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.   Thanks a lot
> Linux advocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my computer.  The least
> you guys can do is fix your 2.6 kernel so it actually works on the
> SuSE distro.  I'm telling everyone I know it 2.6 is a machine killer,
> and unless someone can show me that I did something wrong, this is the
> worst performance I've seen of any software...even open source(which
> is bad, but usually it at least runs!!).
0
11/17/2003 4:37:55 AM
Somewhere around the time of 11/16/2003 09:03, the world stopped and
listened as Peter K�hlmann contributed this to humanity:

> Roy Culley wrote:
> 
> 
>>begin  <3d6111f1.0311160050.e6cda13@posting.google.com>,
>>mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com (Mike Cox) writes:
>>
>>>Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>>>SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>>compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>>
>>>make xconfig
>>>make bzImage
>>>make modules
>>>make modules_install
>>
>>So you can't even be bothered to read the documentation. Tell me,
>>where does it tell you to 'make modules; make modules_install'
>>when building a 2.6 kernel?
>>
>>
>>>I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
>>>other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
>>>I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
>>>completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
>>>mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
>>>
>>>This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.
>>
>>It is you who sucks. SuSE of all distro's provide wonderful
>>documentation.  The fact that you are too lazy to read or too stupid
>>to understand is no fault of SuSE or Linux.
> 
> 
> Well, he would have first, to even let his story be half-true, delete the
> fail-safe kernel which is installed along the normal one.
> Because that entry is always installed by SuSE by default for the 8.2
> version. So if he can no longer boot, it is because he not only messed
> around with things he doesn't know anything of (being the typical dumb as a
> brick windows user), but also conciously deleted his second-last line of
> defense should anything go wrong. Then he still would be able to boot via
> CD.

Wow...  In FreeBSD all you have to do is this:

Have a properly configured /etc/make.conf
Have a properly configured cvsup update file
Have a properly configured kernel definition file

Once that is all done, which is most of the work, all you have to do
from then on is this:

cd /usr/src
make update
mergemaster -p
make buildworld
make buildkernel
make installworld
make installkernel
mergemaster
reboot

> In other words: Mike Cox has the choice between being a lying idiot or just
> a plain windows using moron.
> I'd vote for lying windows using idiot

How about a lying windows user idiot...Oh, I see we've already come to
that conclusion. :-D
-- 
Daniel Rudy

Remove nospam, invalid, and 0123456789 to reply.

0
dcrudy (487)
11/17/2003 9:38:11 AM
Mike Cox wrote:

> SCO is suing Linus.  Microsoft is still number one.  Redhat Linux is
> dumping the small business home user market and giving them
> unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches.  Novell
> bought out SuSE, and as we all know many Novell alumni are now at SCO.
>  Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as SCO does with Linux.
> 
> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
> 
> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install
> 
> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!

That was a dumb move - you effectively wiped out your working kernel.
You should have given it a unique name and added that to grub, then
tried it out.

> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.   Thanks a lot
> Linux advocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my computer.  The least
> you guys can do is fix your 2.6 kernel so it actually works on the
> SuSE distro.  I'm telling everyone I know it 2.6 is a machine killer,
> and unless someone can show me that I did something wrong, this is the
> worst performance I've seen of any software...even open source(which
> is bad, but usually it at least runs!!).

-- 
Pete Goodwin, using XanaNews 1.15.7.4 on Windows 2000.
"Rot begins at the core."
0
11/17/2003 12:26:28 PM
Mike Cox <mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com> wrote:
> SCO is suing Linus.  

No. SCO is suing IBM.
And redhat and IBM are suing SCO.
Getcher facts straight.

> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
> compiled the kernel using the following steps.

> make xconfig
> make bzImage
> make modules
> make modules_install

> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
> other kernel was named this). 

HAHAHA! HAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHA! Fool!
NEVER REPLACE THE ORIGINAL KERNEL WITH ONE YOU JUST COMPILED!


> I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!

It's a partition, moron.
Probably didn't select the right filesystem in the compile. What a twonk.
Either that, or you didn't make a new initrd file for the filesystem
drivers.

> This sucks because I'm now left with a dead machine.  

That's what happens when you delete the working kernel for a test one when
you have no idea what you're doing.

 Thanks a lot
> Linux advocates.  Your lovely kernel killed my computer. 

No. YOU killed your computer.
0
spike1 (8171)
11/17/2003 4:39:55 PM
Jim Bublitz <jbublitzno@spamnwinternet.com> wrote:
> Mike Cox wrote:

>> SCO is suing Linus.

> No, SCO is NOT suing anyone but IBM at the moment.

>> Microsoft is still number one.

> Yeah, but they claim to be trying to improve their security (you
> did mean #1 in exploitability, right?)

Think he meant Number 1 in the "toilet" context.
0
spike1 (8171)
11/17/2003 4:43:44 PM
"Pete Goodwin" <pgoodwin.REMOVE@TO.REPLY.sensaura.com> writes:

> Mike Cox wrote:
>
>> SCO is suing Linus.  Microsoft is still number one.  Redhat Linux is
>> dumping the small business home user market and giving them
>> unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches.  Novell
>> bought out SuSE, and as we all know many Novell alumni are now at SCO.
>>  Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as SCO does with Linux.
>> 
>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>> 
>> make xconfig
>> make bzImage
>> make modules
>> make modules_install
>> 
>> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
>> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
>> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
>> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
>> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
>
> That was a dumb move - you effectively wiped out your working kernel.
> You should have given it a unique name and added that to grub, then
> tried it out.

Indeed, but rescuing one from this mistake is not hard at all.  Mike
Cox is either being funny or amazingly stupid.  I tend to think funny.

After all, if Terry is right, those aren't even the right steps to
compile 2.6 kernels (I wouldn't know).  Mike gratuitously included
those steps as a clue, I think, that he's pulling our legs.

-- 
Jesse F. Hughes
"I think the burden is on those people who think he didn't have
weapons of mass destruction to tell the world where they are."
           -- White House spokesman Ari Fleischer
0
jesse18 (2492)
11/17/2003 6:29:30 PM
Jesse F. Hughes wrote:

> "Pete Goodwin" <pgoodwin.REMOVE@TO.REPLY.sensaura.com> writes:
> 
>> Mike Cox wrote:
>>
>>> SCO is suing Linus.  Microsoft is still number one.  Redhat Linux is
>>> dumping the small business home user market and giving them
>>> unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches.  Novell
>>> bought out SuSE, and as we all know many Novell alumni are now at SCO.
>>>  Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as SCO does with Linux.
>>> 
>>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>> 
>>> make xconfig
>>> make bzImage
>>> make modules
>>> make modules_install
>>> 
>>> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
>>> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
>>> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
>>> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
>>> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
>>
>> That was a dumb move - you effectively wiped out your working kernel.
>> You should have given it a unique name and added that to grub, then
>> tried it out.
> 
> Indeed, but rescuing one from this mistake is not hard at all.  Mike
> Cox is either being funny or amazingly stupid.  I tend to think funny.
> 
> After all, if Terry is right, those aren't even the right steps to
> compile 2.6 kernels (I wouldn't know).  Mike gratuitously included
> those steps as a clue, I think, that he's pulling our legs.
> 

No, they are not the right ones. But I think Mike Cox wanted to bolster his
credibility by including them, unaware that he looks even more the idiot
then. And additionally I think the is lying. There is always the
"fail-safe" boot option for SuSE 8.2. You have to delete that entry from
the grup-menue explicitly to be unable to boot with a kernel replaced
wrongly like he describes. 
So he is still able to boot, and he is a liar, or he has before explicitly
removed the fail-safe entry, which makes him an idiotic troll

I vote for lying idiotic troll
-- 
All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the
parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you
can't get them together again,  there must be a reason. By all means,
do not use a hammer. <from an IBM-Manual>

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/17/2003 6:42:28 PM
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:40:10 +1100, Terry wrote:


> You forgot to mention that "there have been rumours of war and
> pestilence"!

That's one of my favorite phrases :)

>> 
>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use. 
> 
> Nonsense.
> 
>> I am using
>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>> 
>> make xconfig
>> make bzImage
>> make modules
>> make modules_install
> 
> Oh no you didn't. The 2.6 kernel is compiled with a single make command
> after the config, the whole build process is different and simpler.
> 
> Apart from the fact that you're a liar, why would a newbie like you try
> and replace a stable kernel with a *test* kernel ?

One of the 2.6 test kernels comes with SuSE 9.0 and I believe it can be
installed via YaST.

I'm waiting for the released version however :)

 
> Let's see you replace your Windows kernel, Wintroll!

Easy........

format c:/u

Gotta love those question marks!!

flatfish+++

0
flatfish
11/17/2003 6:53:05 PM
Pete Goodwin wrote:

>> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
>> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
>> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
>> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
>> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
> 
> That was a dumb move - you effectively wiped out your working kernel.
> You should have given it a unique name and added that to grub, then
> tried it out.

That's got to be a low point in a trolls life.  Being called stupid by
"Two-NIC" Pete ...

-- 
PeKaJe

Even a cabbage may look at a king.
0
usenet21 (2482)
11/17/2003 8:38:57 PM
flatfish+++ threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:40:10 +1100, Terry wrote:
> 
> 
>> You forgot to mention that "there have been rumours of war and
>> pestilence"!
> 
> That's one of my favorite phrases :)

I may have unconsciously stolen it from you after seeing you use it over the
last 6years ?

> 
>>> 
>>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use. 
>> 
>> Nonsense.
>> 
>>> I am using
>>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>> 
>>> make xconfig
>>> make bzImage
>>> make modules
>>> make modules_install
>> 
>> Oh no you didn't. The 2.6 kernel is compiled with a single make command
>> after the config, the whole build process is different and simpler.
>> 
>> Apart from the fact that you're a liar, why would a newbie like you try
>> and replace a stable kernel with a *test* kernel ?
> 
> One of the 2.6 test kernels comes with SuSE 9.0 and I believe it can be
> installed via YaST.
> 
> I'm waiting for the released version however :)

An excellent idea in my opinion.

Whilst its cool to use the latest kernel, I believe that unless one *needs*
a facility it provides, that the exercise is probably more trouble than
its worth, especially when going from a 2.4 to a 2.6 kernel with the
attendant differences in modules etc.

> 
>  
>> Let's see you replace your Windows kernel, Wintroll!
> 
> Easy........
> 
> format c:/u
> 
> Gotta love those question marks!!

LOL!



-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/17/2003 10:27:21 PM
Jesse F. Hughes threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> "Pete Goodwin" <pgoodwin.REMOVE@TO.REPLY.sensaura.com> writes:
> 
>> Mike Cox wrote:
>>
>>> SCO is suing Linus.  Microsoft is still number one.  Redhat Linux is
>>> dumping the small business home user market and giving them
>>> unsupported beta Fedora distro that has no backward patches.  Novell
>>> bought out SuSE, and as we all know many Novell alumni are now at SCO.
>>>  Novell will take care of SuSE the same way as SCO does with Linux.
>>> 
>>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>> 
>>> make xconfig
>>> make bzImage
>>> make modules
>>> make modules_install
>>> 
>>> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
>>> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
>>> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
>>> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
>>> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
>>
>> That was a dumb move - you effectively wiped out your working kernel.
>> You should have given it a unique name and added that to grub, then
>> tried it out.
> 
> Indeed, but rescuing one from this mistake is not hard at all.  Mike
> Cox is either being funny or amazingly stupid.  I tend to think funny.
> 
> After all, if Terry is right, those aren't even the right steps to
> compile 2.6 kernels (I wouldn't know).  Mike gratuitously included
> those steps as a clue, I think, that he's pulling our legs.

Here is the 2.5.74 kernel build advice issued immediately after
finishing make menuconfig (note the 2.6 make procedure is the same):-

*** End of Linux kernel configuration.
*** Execute 'make' to build the kernel or try 'make help'.

This message is different to previous 2.4 kernels.

Now we "make" the kernel 
root@gronk:/usr/src/linux-2.5.74# make -j2 CC=distcc

.....5 minutes later...


Root device is (3, 3)
Boot sector 512 bytes.
Setup is 2586 bytes.
System is 1973 kB
Kernel: arch/i386/boot/bzImage is ready

Note that it automatically makes the bzImage. This is a direct
contradiction to "Mike Cox's" need to make the bzImage himself, as
repeated below.

>>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>> 
>>> make xconfig
>>> make bzImage
>>> make modules
>>> make modules_install


One need only read what the cli returns after the "make" command is
issued to see that no "make bzImage" is required.

Personally I think that the "Cox" report is a fabrication with some
parts taken from older kernel instructions.

> 
> -- 
> Jesse F. Hughes
> "I think the burden is on those people who think he didn't have
> weapons of mass destruction to tell the world where they are."
>            -- White House spokesman Ari Fleischer


-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/17/2003 11:14:42 PM
Peter K�hlmann threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

<deletia> 
> No, they are not the right ones. But I think Mike Cox wanted to bolster his
> credibility by including them, unaware that he looks even more the idiot
> then. And additionally I think the is lying. There is always the
> "fail-safe" boot option for SuSE 8.2. You have to delete that entry from
> the grup-menue explicitly to be unable to boot with a kernel replaced
> wrongly like he describes. 
> So he is still able to boot, and he is a liar, or he has before explicitly
> removed the fail-safe entry, which makes him an idiotic troll
> 
> I vote for lying idiotic troll

Seconded!

But I would like to add "six fingered, inbred, cretinous" as a prefix if
that's ok ?

Mike Cox, you're a six fingered, inbred, cretinous, lying idiotic
troll!

-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/17/2003 11:17:09 PM
Peter Jensen threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> Pete Goodwin wrote:
> 
>>> I moved the resulting bzImage to /boot, and renamed it vmlinuz(my
>>> other kernel was named this).  I have grub on SuSE 8.2, and I assumed
>>> I was done.  Unfortunatly, the 2.6-test9 kernel failed to EVEN boot
>>> completely!!!  I got an error message stating the kernel couldn't
>>> mount hda3 (what ever that is)!!!
>> 
>> That was a dumb move - you effectively wiped out your working kernel.
>> You should have given it a unique name and added that to grub, then
>> tried it out.
> 
> That's got to be a low point in a trolls life.  Being called stupid by
> "Two-NIC" Pete ...

Bwahahahahahaahh!

Mike Cox should now slink away in shame!

-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/17/2003 11:17:57 PM
spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote in message news:<rktapb.dlh.ln@freenet.co.uk>...

> Either that, or you didn't make a new initrd file for the filesystem
> drivers.
> 

What is an initrd file?  How do I make one?  This is a step that I missed I think.
0
mikecoxlinux (652)
11/17/2003 11:27:01 PM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:27:21 +1100,
 Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
> flatfish+++ threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:40:10 +1100, Terry wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> You forgot to mention that "there have been rumours of war and
>>> pestilence"!
>> 
>> That's one of my favorite phrases :)
>
> I may have unconsciously stolen it from you after seeing you use it over the
> last 6years ?
>
>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use. 
>>> 
>>> Nonsense.
>>> 
>>>> I am using
>>>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>>> 
>>>> make xconfig
>>>> make bzImage
>>>> make modules
>>>> make modules_install
>>> 
>>> Oh no you didn't. The 2.6 kernel is compiled with a single make command
>>> after the config, the whole build process is different and simpler.
>>> 
>>> Apart from the fact that you're a liar, why would a newbie like you try
>>> and replace a stable kernel with a *test* kernel ?
>> 
>> One of the 2.6 test kernels comes with SuSE 9.0 and I believe it can be
>> installed via YaST.
>> 
>> I'm waiting for the released version however :)
>
> An excellent idea in my opinion.
>
> Whilst its cool to use the latest kernel, I believe that unless one *needs*
> a facility it provides, that the exercise is probably more trouble than
> its worth, especially when going from a 2.4 to a 2.6 kernel with the
> attendant differences in modules etc.
>


I am using (and have been for a few weeks) the 2.6 kernels on my laptop.
Haven't noticed a lot of differences, but I had the preemption and low
latency patches allready installed on the 2.4 stuff. 

There are some nice touches, top, now shows io wait in the stats, and
the new kernel gui config is nice. 

make dep is gone, and some other stuff has changed around. About the
only thing I have problems with, is the NVIDIA closed source drivers,
they need to be patched to work with 2.6, so I am using the nv drivers
from the XFREE86 project. Other than no hw 3D, they work great. So I
have cut down on my games for a bit. I can live with that for now. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/uXDtd90bcYOAWPYRAqLTAJ9tmeQO44g2VW3qKhnV8M7PtqG1PACfWUHc
ZB7ze3ARTAoheLBqtzI5IQs=
=R7Ee
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Life suddenly made much more sense, the day i fully grokked
 that people are stupid. --Frank Sweetser
0
warlock (9522)
11/18/2003 1:07:57 AM
On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:07:57 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:


> 
> I am using (and have been for a few weeks) the 2.6 kernels on my laptop.
> Haven't noticed a lot of differences, but I had the preemption and low
> latency patches allready installed on the 2.4 stuff. 

I don't know for a fact, but I believe that SuSE installed and tweaked the
2.4.21-99 default kernel in 9.0 for low latenacy and so forth.

I thought I had read that someplace.



flatfish+++
0
flatfish
11/18/2003 3:19:34 AM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 03:19:34 GMT,
 flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail+++.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:07:57 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>
>> 
>> I am using (and have been for a few weeks) the 2.6 kernels on my laptop.
>> Haven't noticed a lot of differences, but I had the preemption and low
>> latency patches allready installed on the 2.4 stuff. 
>
> I don't know for a fact, but I believe that SuSE installed and tweaked the
> 2.4.21-99 default kernel in 9.0 for low latenacy and so forth.
>
> I thought I had read that someplace.
>
>
>
> flatfish+++


Several of the end user type distros did. I generally compile the
kernel, mostly for fun, on my laptop and a couple of other machines.
Although the servers tend to be run with stock kernels from the distro. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/uasmd90bcYOAWPYRAnfQAJ42Tqc41Kg813u/Txcj2dLgiYjk/wCgoPok
S3uI3r8I9EDY/cZ93+u8bYo=
=Juy4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Life is too short to be taken seriously.
-- Oscar Wilde
0
warlock (9522)
11/18/2003 5:16:22 AM
Jim Richardson threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:27:21 +1100,
>  Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
<deletia> 

>> Whilst its cool to use the latest kernel, I believe that unless one *needs*
>> a facility it provides, that the exercise is probably more trouble than
>> its worth, especially when going from a 2.4 to a 2.6 kernel with the
>> attendant differences in modules etc.
>>
> 
> 
> I am using (and have been for a few weeks) the 2.6 kernels on my laptop.
> Haven't noticed a lot of differences, but I had the preemption and low
> latency patches allready installed on the 2.4 stuff. 

I'm just running the vanilla 2.4.21  myself, and have no observable
latency problems :)

> 
> There are some nice touches, top, now shows io wait in the stats, and
> the new kernel gui config is nice. 

Yeah the new kernel build is a doddle!

> 
> make dep is gone, and some other stuff has changed around. About the
> only thing I have problems with, is the NVIDIA closed source drivers,
> they need to be patched to work with 2.6, so I am using the nv drivers
> from the XFREE86 project.

Erk, the Nvidia binaries give about a 40x speed increase here!

> Other than no hw 3D, they work great. So I
> have cut down on my games for a bit. I can live with that for now. 

Understand. Sadly its yet another example of Nvidia's partial GNU/Linux
support.

Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
be all I'll ever spend on your products.



-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/18/2003 8:13:59 AM
Mike Cox wrote:

> spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote in message
> news:<rktapb.dlh.ln@freenet.co.uk>...
> 
>> Either that, or you didn't make a new initrd file for the filesystem
>> drivers.
>> 
> 
> What is an initrd file?  How do I make one?  This is a step that I missed
> I think.

How about just learning a little and then try what you do now?
And when you have learned to not start as an idiot wintroll, come back for
help. As of now, get lost, idiot
-- 
Who the fuck is General Failure, and why is he reading my harddisk?

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/18/2003 8:18:43 AM
Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> writes:

>>>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>>>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>>> 
>>>> make xconfig
>>>> make bzImage
>>>> make modules
>>>> make modules_install
>
>
> One need only read what the cli returns after the "make" command is
> issued to see that no "make bzImage" is required.

Okay, so it's not required, but is it an acceptable sequence of steps?
Can you make a 2.6 kernel by issuing these commands?  If so, it's not
so convincing that he *didn't* issue them (note: this contradicts my
argument he was pulling our legs).  

After all, regardless of what "make configure" tells one to do, the
old Kernel HOWTOs and other sources still advise one to do the above.

If the above steps can be used to make a 2.6 kernel, then the fact
that they are not necessary doesn't tell us he is lying about what he
did.

Of course, anyone who thinks he should run a test kernel but has never
compiled and installed a kernel before in his life (which is suggested
by the fact that he didn't leave a "safe" kernel available and that he
doesn't know how to boot his machine with a rescue disk) is stupid.
Or pulling our leg.  Whichever.

> Personally I think that the "Cox" report is a fabrication with some
> parts taken from older kernel instructions.

If I was to download and install the 2.6 kernel, I'd probably do 
"make bzImage" out of habit.  I don't think that feature of his report
is all that telling, given that those instructions still work (a fact
which I don't know, but I think you suggested above).

-- 
"Mathematicians are rather important in the infrastructures of many
organizations that protect civilization.  I've determined that they
are a consistent security risk, and seem to have other agendas, other
loyalties beyond loyalty to their respective nations." -- James Harris
0
jesse18 (2492)
11/18/2003 9:17:57 AM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:13:59 +1100,
 Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
> Jim Richardson threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:27:21 +1100,
>>  Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
><deletia> 
>
>>> Whilst its cool to use the latest kernel, I believe that unless one *needs*
>>> a facility it provides, that the exercise is probably more trouble than
>>> its worth, especially when going from a 2.4 to a 2.6 kernel with the
>>> attendant differences in modules etc.
>>>
>> 
>> 
>> I am using (and have been for a few weeks) the 2.6 kernels on my laptop.
>> Haven't noticed a lot of differences, but I had the preemption and low
>> latency patches allready installed on the 2.4 stuff. 
>
> I'm just running the vanilla 2.4.21  myself, and have no observable
> latency problems :)
>

Once a day, I parse a 1-1.5GB apache log file, uncompressing it from
it's 120MB or so size, to the full glory of the days hits for one of the
servers, and running webalizer on it, as well as the decompression, on a
machine with 512MB of ram, causes some twitching. It's less with the
lo-lat patch, and perhaps less, although I have no hard numbers, with
the 2.6 kernel.

In either case, it's not a huge difference, but it's noticable. Others,
with other usage patterns, have reported quite an improvement. I think
it really depends on what, and how, you use the machine to do. 



>> 
>> There are some nice touches, top, now shows io wait in the stats, and
>> the new kernel gui config is nice. 
>
> Yeah the new kernel build is a doddle!
>
>> 
>> make dep is gone, and some other stuff has changed around. About the
>> only thing I have problems with, is the NVIDIA closed source drivers,
>> they need to be patched to work with 2.6, so I am using the nv drivers
>> from the XFREE86 project.
>
> Erk, the Nvidia binaries give about a 40x speed increase here!

Only for 3D, if I was playing games with the machine more, I'd wory
about it, but for watching dvds, and working, it's fine. The nv driver
is no good for quake, et al, but it's fine for most everything else. If
I do feel the need for UT, then I can drop back to the 2.4 kernel setup,
or patching the NVIDIA binary driver for 2.6. 

>
>> Other than no hw 3D, they work great. So I
>> have cut down on my games for a bit. I can live with that for now. 
>
> Understand. Sadly its yet another example of Nvidia's partial GNU/Linux
> support.
>
> Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
> year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
> be all I'll ever spend on your products.
>
>

Yeah, I have two NVidia cards in different machines, I'd far rather the
NVidia drivers were OSS, I have less problems with OSS stuff screwing
up. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/uekgd90bcYOAWPYRAr9iAJ9cZ2OTK3PVo3W9QvKBx2KfawR32gCcCgsH
5y+KvSnFkWc2tefOodszM5g=
=wTwi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Documentation is like sex; when it's good, it's very, very good, and when
it's bad, it's better than nothing.
-- Dick Brandon
0
warlock (9522)
11/18/2003 9:40:48 AM
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:13:59 +1100, Terry wrote:
> Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
> year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
> be all I'll ever spend on your products.

Good luck finding a graphics card manufacturer with better driver support
than nVidia. Unless you want a Linux box that crashes every time you move
the mouse pointer.

BTW: you might find you get better results by emailing them, instead of
bitching on this newsgroup.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/18/2003 9:47:58 AM
Milo T. wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:13:59 +1100, Terry wrote:
>> Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
>> year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
>> be all I'll ever spend on your products.
> 
> Good luck finding a graphics card manufacturer with better driver support
> than nVidia. Unless you want a Linux box that crashes every time you move
> the mouse pointer.
> 

Try Matrox, for starters. And then you may provide the URLs to tis multitude
of msgs which talk about crashes when you move the mouse pointer. Don't
forget, OS should be linux, not windows

> BTW: you might find you get better results by emailing them, instead of
> bitching on this newsgroup.

And while were just at it, Simon:

Tell us, Simon, what did you want to do with the info of people who had
done nothing to you except showing what kind of cretin you really are?
Who had not posted your info here?
-- 
Never put off till tomorrow what you can avoid all together.

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/18/2003 9:53:05 AM
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:53:05 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:
> Tell us, Simon, what did you want to do with the info of people who had
> done nothing to you except showing what kind of cretin you really are?
> Who had not posted your info here?

Go away, biatch. Go play with your dollies.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/18/2003 10:02:54 AM
Milo T. wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:53:05 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:
>> Tell us, Simon, what did you want to do with the info of people who had
>> done nothing to you except showing what kind of cretin you really are?
>> Who had not posted your info here?
> 
> Go away, biatch. Go play with your dollies.

Make me

And while were just at it, Simon, another question you try to evade as much
as possible:

Tell us, Simon, what did you want to do with the info of people who had
done nothing to you except showing what kind of cretin you really are?
Who had not posted your info here?
-- 
Howe's Law:    Everyone has a scheme that will not work.

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/18/2003 10:38:30 AM
Milo T. threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:13:59 +1100, Terry wrote:
>> Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
>> year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
>> be all I'll ever spend on your products.
> 
> Good luck finding a graphics card manufacturer with better driver support
> than nVidia. Unless you want a Linux box that crashes every time you move
> the mouse pointer.
> 
> BTW: you might find you get better results by emailing them, instead of
> bitching on this newsgroup.

Simon, your delinquent Wintroll ego is only exceeded by the sheer volumes of
nonsense you dump here on Cola.

-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/18/2003 11:43:45 AM
Peter K�hlmann threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> Milo T. wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:13:59 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>> Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
>>> year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
>>> be all I'll ever spend on your products.
>> 
>> Good luck finding a graphics card manufacturer with better driver support
>> than nVidia. Unless you want a Linux box that crashes every time you move
>> the mouse pointer.
>> 
> 
> Try Matrox, for starters. And then you may provide the URLs to tis multitude
> of msgs which talk about crashes when you move the mouse pointer. Don't
> forget, OS should be linux, not windows

Agreed Matrox have always had great GNU/Linux support, open too!

<deletia>  


-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/18/2003 11:44:39 AM
Jesse F. Hughes threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> writes:
> 
>>>>> Contrary to what the advocates say, Linux is hard to use.  I am using
>>>>> SuSE 8.2 and my upgrade to the 2.6 test-9 kernel was unsuccessful.  I
>>>>> compiled the kernel using the following steps.
>>>>> 
>>>>> make xconfig
>>>>> make bzImage
>>>>> make modules
>>>>> make modules_install
>>
>>
>> One need only read what the cli returns after the "make" command is
>> issued to see that no "make bzImage" is required.
> 
> Okay, so it's not required, but is it an acceptable sequence of steps?
> Can you make a 2.6 kernel by issuing these commands? 

After you quiered me, I used my old 2.47 kernel and repeated the steps.
Much to my supprise, *yes* it does work as listed above:-

>>>>> make xconfig
>>>>> make bzImage
>>>>> make modules
>>>>> make modules_install


> If so, it's not
> so convincing that he *didn't* issue them (note: this contradicts my
> argument he was pulling our legs).

Either way you're right, he could well have compiled his 2.6 kernel
that way. I was supprised because when I first compiled that kernel, I 
used the old techniques of "make dep" after "make menuconfif" and
received this warning "root@gronk:/usr/src/linux-2.5.74# make dep
*** Warning: make dep is unnecessary now."

I was wrong in claiming he didn't compile a 2.6 kernel that way, but
I still think "Mike Cox" is a Wintroll.

> 
> After all, regardless of what "make configure" tells one to do, the
> old Kernel HOWTOs and other sources still advise one to do the above.

True.

> 
> If the above steps can be used to make a 2.6 kernel, then the fact
> that they are not necessary doesn't tell us he is lying about what he
> did.

I agree.

> 
> Of course, anyone who thinks he should run a test kernel but has never
> compiled and installed a kernel before in his life (which is suggested
> by the fact that he didn't leave a "safe" kernel available and that he
> doesn't know how to boot his machine with a rescue disk) is stupid.
> Or pulling our leg.  Whichever.

I agree as well. Even if he has set the boot procedure up properly
(easy to do) his machine would have bombed badly on the 2.6 kernel as
various other utilities are required such as handling the new module
structure.

I know, I've tried the same thing.

> 
>> Personally I think that the "Cox" report is a fabrication with some
>> parts taken from older kernel instructions.
> 
> If I was to download and install the 2.6 kernel, I'd probably do 
> "make bzImage" out of habit.  I don't think that feature of his report
> is all that telling, given that those instructions still work (a fact
> which I don't know, but I think you suggested above).

You are correct, his method as described will in fact compile a kernel
and make the modules.


-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/18/2003 11:55:54 AM
Mike Cox wrote: (nothing much)

Didn't you say that you were going some time back?  Please, don't think we
missed you.
0
jhaig1 (53)
11/18/2003 12:49:37 PM
On 2003-11-18, Jim Richardson <warlock@eskimo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Only for 3D, if I was playing games with the machine more, I'd wory
> about it, but for watching dvds, and working, it's fine. The nv driver
> is no good for quake, et al, but it's fine for most everything else. If
> I do feel the need for UT, then I can drop back to the 2.4 kernel setup,
> or patching the NVIDIA binary driver for 2.6. 


FYI:  The patch for the 2.6 NVIDIA driver doesn't patch the binary part,
its a patch for the source code, or the "open" part of the driver.  Its
actually not that hard to do.  After building and running the 2.6 kernel
(keep the 2.6 source installed for the headers), unpack NVIDIA's driver
-4496 using the option to unpack only, download the new installer and
diff file for -4496 from www.minion.de, overwrite the old
nvidia-installer program with the new one, and in the ./usr/src/nv
directory run patch on the diff file, copy Makefile.kbuild to Makefile
there, then run the installer as usual.
0
EdCogburn (227)
11/18/2003 5:19:49 PM
On 2003-11-18, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
> Peter K�hlmann threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
>
>> Milo T. wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:13:59 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>>> Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
>>>> year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
>>>> be all I'll ever spend on your products.
>>> 
>>> Good luck finding a graphics card manufacturer with better driver support
>>> than nVidia. Unless you want a Linux box that crashes every time you move
>>> the mouse pointer.
>>> 
>> 
>> Try Matrox, for starters. And then you may provide the URLs to tis multitude
>> of msgs which talk about crashes when you move the mouse pointer. Don't
>> forget, OS should be linux, not windows
>
> Agreed Matrox have always had great GNU/Linux support, open too!


Is the whole driver open-source?  I just did a quick search and found
one Matrox driver where only the basic 2D support is open, and a closed
source component is used for extended capabilities.  On the main
website, Matrox also provides their drivers only in an rpm package which
makes me suspect that its a binary driver only for the listed version of
RedHat.  NVIDIA's drivers can be used on almost any distribution since
you compile the driver yourself.  Correct me if I'm wrong, I can't look
at their drivers because you have to be a registered user to be allowed
to download them, but I would be real surprised to find *any*
manufacturer of a modern 3D hardware-accelerated video card
open-sourcing the *whole* driver.
0
EdCogburn (227)
11/18/2003 5:32:10 PM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 18 Nov 2003 17:19:49 GMT,
 Ed Cogburn <edcogburn@hotpop.com> wrote:
> On 2003-11-18, Jim Richardson <warlock@eskimo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Only for 3D, if I was playing games with the machine more, I'd wory
>> about it, but for watching dvds, and working, it's fine. The nv driver
>> is no good for quake, et al, but it's fine for most everything else. If
>> I do feel the need for UT, then I can drop back to the 2.4 kernel setup,
>> or patching the NVIDIA binary driver for 2.6. 
>
>
> FYI:  The patch for the 2.6 NVIDIA driver doesn't patch the binary part,
> its a patch for the source code, or the "open" part of the driver.  Its
> actually not that hard to do.  After building and running the 2.6 kernel
> (keep the 2.6 source installed for the headers), unpack NVIDIA's driver
> -4496 using the option to unpack only, download the new installer and
> diff file for -4496 from www.minion.de, overwrite the old
> nvidia-installer program with the new one, and in the ./usr/src/nv
> directory run patch on the diff file, copy Makefile.kbuild to Makefile
> there, then run the installer as usual.

thanks, I'll give that a try sometime in the near future. I may want to
UT2003 a little :)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/ump/d90bcYOAWPYRAto6AJ9R0mG3T1XclVqwbdEvyTV9lTg4NQCfdNVJ
Sufmvl8SrA+1xiRRcbRKV6I=
=uWwy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Man's way to God is with beer in hand.
--Koffyar Tribal Wisdom, Nigeria
0
warlock (9522)
11/18/2003 6:52:47 PM
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Terry
<tjporter@gronk.porter.net>
 wrote
on Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:17:09 +1100
<lg1o81-tfb.ln1@gronk.porter.net>:
> Peter K�hlmann threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
> 
> <deletia> 
>> No, they are not the right ones. But I think Mike Cox wanted to bolster his
>> credibility by including them, unaware that he looks even more the idiot
>> then. And additionally I think the is lying. There is always the
>> "fail-safe" boot option for SuSE 8.2. You have to delete that entry from
>> the grup-menue explicitly to be unable to boot with a kernel replaced
>> wrongly like he describes. 
>> So he is still able to boot, and he is a liar, or he has before explicitly
>> removed the fail-safe entry, which makes him an idiotic troll
>> 
>> I vote for lying idiotic troll
> 
> Seconded!
> 
> But I would like to add "six fingered, inbred, cretinous" as a prefix if
> that's ok ?
> 
> Mike Cox, you're a six fingered, inbred, cretinous, lying idiotic
> troll!

Why would anyone need more than three fingers to work with
Microsoft? :-)

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
0
ewill (4394)
11/18/2003 8:59:29 PM
Mike Cox <mikecoxlinux@yahoo.com> did eloquently scribble:
> spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote in message news:<rktapb.dlh.ln@freenet.co.uk>...
> 
>> Either that, or you didn't make a new initrd file for the filesystem
>> drivers.
>> 
> 
> What is an initrd file?  How do I make one?  This is a step that I missed
> I think.

you use the mkinitrd (or mk_initrd) command depending on which version of
SuSE you're using. initrd == initial ram disk, used by lilo or grub to
pre-load needed modules before the filesystems can be mounted.

so if your kernel's called bzImage and the kernel version's 2.6-test2 then
the command (in suse) would be mkinitrd -k bzImage -i initrd-2.6-test2
then you add the initrd line to your lilo.conf (or menu.1st for grub) and in
lilo's case, rerun lilo.

-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
|   spike1@freenet.co.uk   | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste!         |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)|  I can SMELL!!!  KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and    |
|            in            |  get out the puncture repair kit!"              |
|     Computer Science     |     Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf              |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
spike1 (8171)
11/18/2003 9:03:53 PM
In Dread Ink, the Grave hand of Terry Did Inscribe:
>
> I'm just running the vanilla 2.4.21  myself, and have no observable
> latency problems :)

I am running 2.4.22-1-686 as packaged by Debian Sid, and 
haven't noticed any problems with using it as my workstation...

-- 
Yes, I neglected to remember Detroit's interim measure of trading
UAW-staffed Big 3 Auto manufacturing plants in north.us for Japanese-owned
non-union plants in south.us before NAFTA encouraged wholesale shipment of
plants to Mexico.	-- Kevin in ASR
0
bsims (38)
11/18/2003 11:56:23 PM
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:32:10 +0000, Ed Cogburn wrote:

> On 2003-11-18, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>> Peter K�hlmann threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>
>>> Milo T. wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:13:59 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>>>> Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
>>>>> year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
>>>>> be all I'll ever spend on your products.
>>>> 
>>>> Good luck finding a graphics card manufacturer with better driver support
>>>> than nVidia. Unless you want a Linux box that crashes every time you move
>>>> the mouse pointer.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Try Matrox, for starters. And then you may provide the URLs to tis multitude
>>> of msgs which talk about crashes when you move the mouse pointer. Don't
>>> forget, OS should be linux, not windows
>>
>> Agreed Matrox have always had great GNU/Linux support, open too!
> 
> 
> Is the whole driver open-source?  I just did a quick search and found
> one Matrox driver where only the basic 2D support is open, and a closed
> source component is used for extended capabilities.  On the main
> website, Matrox also provides their drivers only in an rpm package which
> makes me suspect that its a binary driver only for the listed version of
> RedHat.  NVIDIA's drivers can be used on almost any distribution since
> you compile the driver yourself.  Correct me if I'm wrong, I can't look
> at their drivers because you have to be a registered user to be allowed
> to download them, but I would be real surprised to find *any*
> manufacturer of a modern 3D hardware-accelerated video card
> open-sourcing the *whole* driver.


The problem with Matrox is that although they make one of if not *the*
best all around cards for office work, they are a poor choice for gaming
compared to the likes of Nvidia/ATI.

If you are looking for crisp text and great color balance along with a
card that co-exists peacefully with other cards you can't beat Matrox
though.

flatfish+++


0
flatfish
11/19/2003 2:12:33 AM
The Ghost In The Machine blubbered effusively on Tue, 18 Nov 2003 at 20:59 GMT:

> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Terry
><tjporter@gronk.porter.net>
>  wrote
> on Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:17:09 +1100

>> Seconded!
>> 
>> But I would like to add "six fingered, inbred, cretinous" as a prefix if
>> that's ok ?
>> 
>> Mike Cox, you're a six fingered, inbred, cretinous, lying idiotic
>> troll!
> 
> Why would anyone need more than three fingers to work with
> Microsoft? :-

They shouldn't. But I think Mike Crocks was being flattered because he
can use either a left- /or/ right-handed MICROS~1 keyboard.

-- 
The box said Windows XP or better. So I installed Linux.
0
sm9906 (324)
11/19/2003 2:54:22 AM
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:38:30 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:

> Milo T. wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:53:05 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:
>>> Tell us, Simon, what did you want to do with the info of people who had
>>> done nothing to you except showing what kind of cretin you really are?
>>> Who had not posted your info here?
>> 
>> Go away, biatch. Go play with your dollies.
> 
> Make me
> 
> And while were just at it, Simon, another question you try to evade as much
> as possible:
> 
> Tell us, Simon, what did you want to do with the info of people who had
> done nothing to you except showing what kind of cretin you really are?
> Who had not posted your info here?

Peter... I'm not going to keep answering the same question again and again.
You can ask it all you like. My answer is in the archives. Several times.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/19/2003 6:22:34 AM
Milo T. wrote:

> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:38:30 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:
> 
>> Milo T. wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:53:05 +0100, Peter K�hlmann wrote:
>>>> Tell us, Simon, what did you want to do with the info of people who had
>>>> done nothing to you except showing what kind of cretin you really are?
>>>> Who had not posted your info here?
>>> 
>>> Go away, biatch. Go play with your dollies.
>> 
>> Make me
>> 
>> And while were just at it, Simon, another question you try to evade as
>> much as possible:
>> 
>> Tell us, Simon, what did you want to do with the info of people who had
>> done nothing to you except showing what kind of cretin you really are?
>> Who had not posted your info here?
> 
> Peter... I'm not going to keep answering the same question again and
> again. You can ask it all you like. My answer is in the archives. Several
> times.

Your "answer" is a baldfaced lie

And while were just at it, Simon, the questions you try to evade as
much as possible:
 
What are they (the FSF) doing that you claim is vile and evil?

Or:

So you don't really think they are vile and evil? you just say it?

And, naturally:

Tell us, Simon, what did you want to do with the info of people who had
done nothing to you except showing what kind of cretin you really are?
Who had not posted your info here?
-- 
Linux: Because rebooting is for adding new hardware

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/19/2003 6:47:22 AM
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 22:43:45 +1100, Terry wrote:

> Milo T. threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:13:59 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>> Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
>>> year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
>>> be all I'll ever spend on your products.
>> 
>> Good luck finding a graphics card manufacturer with better driver support
>> than nVidia. Unless you want a Linux box that crashes every time you move
>> the mouse pointer.
>> 
>> BTW: you might find you get better results by emailing them, instead of
>> bitching on this newsgroup.
> 
> Simon, your delinquent Wintroll ego is only exceeded by the sheer volumes of
> nonsense you dump here on Cola.

If that's the case, Terry, then please tell me of an off-the-shelf,
commonly available, high quality, high performance graphics card
manufacturer with better support for Linux.

And also tell me why you think posting here bitching about them will get
you *anywhere*, instead of requesting help directly, where they can take
your request as a metric in determining the size of the Linux userbase.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/19/2003 8:38:29 AM
Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> On 2003-11-18, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>> Peter K�hlmann threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>
>>> Milo T. wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:13:59 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>>>> Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
>>>>> year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
>>>>> be all I'll ever spend on your products.
>>>> 
>>>> Good luck finding a graphics card manufacturer with better driver support
>>>> than nVidia. Unless you want a Linux box that crashes every time you move
>>>> the mouse pointer.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> Try Matrox, for starters. And then you may provide the URLs to tis multitude
>>> of msgs which talk about crashes when you move the mouse pointer. Don't
>>> forget, OS should be linux, not windows
>>
>> Agreed Matrox have always had great GNU/Linux support, open too!
> 
> 
> Is the whole driver open-source?  I just did a quick search and found
> one Matrox driver where only the basic 2D support is open, and a closed
> source component is used for extended capabilities.  On the main
> website, Matrox also provides their drivers only in an rpm package which
> makes me suspect that its a binary driver only for the listed version of
> RedHat.  NVIDIA's drivers can be used on almost any distribution since
> you compile the driver yourself.  Correct me if I'm wrong, I can't look
> at their drivers because you have to be a registered user to be allowed
> to download them, but I would be real surprised to find *any*
> manufacturer of a modern 3D hardware-accelerated video card
> open-sourcing the *whole* driver.

Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)

I admit my information re Matrox is second hand and as Matrox support
is included in the kernel, I *thought* it was open source.

I remember reading a few docs claiming that Matrox was the best
supported video card for GNU/Linux, G400?

So yeah, as I don't have a Matrox card myself, I may be wrong.
-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/19/2003 12:01:49 PM
The Ghost In The Machine threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

<deletia> 
>> Mike Cox, you're a six fingered, inbred, cretinous, lying idiotic
>> troll!
> 
> Why would anyone need more than three fingers to work with
> Microsoft? :-)

Don't you mean, "why anyone need more than three fingers to make
Microsoft work ?" ;-)



-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/19/2003 12:05:49 PM
Terry wrote:

> The Ghost In The Machine threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
> 
> <deletia>
>>> Mike Cox, you're a six fingered, inbred, cretinous, lying idiotic
>>> troll!
>> 
>> Why would anyone need more than three fingers to work with
>> Microsoft? :-)
> 
> Don't you mean, "why anyone need more than three fingers to make
> Microsoft work ?" ;-)
> 
> 

<http://www.edge-inc.net/humor/index.cfm/page/one/id/850/t/Image.htm>

-- 
COMPUTER POWER TO THE PEOPLE! DOWN WITH CYBERCRUD!
0
paul_cooke (974)
11/19/2003 1:56:19 PM
flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail+++.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:07:57 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:


>> 
>> I am using (and have been for a few weeks) the 2.6 kernels on my laptop.
>> Haven't noticed a lot of differences, but I had the preemption and low
>> latency patches allready installed on the 2.4 stuff. 

> I don't know for a fact, but I believe that SuSE installed and tweaked the
> 2.4.21-99 default kernel in 9.0 for low latenacy and so forth.

> I thought I had read that someplace.

They backported quite a few 2.6 things into their stock kernel for SuSE 9.
0
spike1 (8171)
11/19/2003 3:14:00 PM
spike1@freenet.co.uk wrote:

> flatfish+++ <flatfish@linuxmail+++.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:07:57 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
> 
> 
>>> 
>>> I am using (and have been for a few weeks) the 2.6 kernels on my laptop.
>>> Haven't noticed a lot of differences, but I had the preemption and low
>>> latency patches allready installed on the 2.4 stuff.
> 
>> I don't know for a fact, but I believe that SuSE installed and tweaked
>> the 2.4.21-99 default kernel in 9.0 for low latenacy and so forth.
> 
>> I thought I had read that someplace.
> 
> They backported quite a few 2.6 things into their stock kernel for SuSE 9.

Still, the real 2.6 kernel "feels" faster. It is not really much faster in
day to day use. I have tried the 2.6.5 kernel SuSE supplies and also the
latest 2.6.9 kernel. I still use mainly the 2.4 kernel for daily use, the
other to get the hang of it
-- 
Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
        Let it get in YOUR way. The problem for your problem.

0
Peter.Koehlmann (13228)
11/19/2003 3:43:11 PM
Jesse F. Hughes <jesse@phiwumbda.org> wrote:
> Of course, anyone who thinks he should run a test kernel but has never
> compiled and installed a kernel before in his life (which is suggested
> by the fact that he didn't leave a "safe" kernel available and that he
> doesn't know how to boot his machine with a rescue disk) is stupid.
> Or pulling our leg.  Whichever.

Note: "couldn't mount /dev/hda2... whatever that is"
i.e. he doesn't even know what a partition is, let alone an intial ramdisk
image.
0
spike1 (8171)
11/19/2003 3:47:25 PM
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Terry
<tjporter@gronk.porter.net>
 wrote
on Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:05:49 +1100
<tt2s81-1cm.ln1@gronk.porter.net>:
> The Ghost In The Machine threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
> 
> <deletia> 
>>> Mike Cox, you're a six fingered, inbred, cretinous, lying idiotic
>>> troll!
>> 
>> Why would anyone need more than three fingers to work with
>> Microsoft? :-)
> 
> Don't you mean, "why anyone need more than three fingers to make
> Microsoft work ?" ;-)
> 

Hmmm....well, I suppose, at least until it blue screens again.... :-)

-- 
#191, ewill3@earthlink.net
It's still legal to go .sigless.
0
ewill (4394)
11/19/2003 4:59:31 PM
On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
>
>> On 2003-11-18, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>> Peter K�hlmann threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>
>>>> Milo T. wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:13:59 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>>>>> Note to Nvidia: I've spend about $300 on your products in the last
>>>>>> year, so please put some *real* effort into Linux support or that will
>>>>>> be all I'll ever spend on your products.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Good luck finding a graphics card manufacturer with better driver support
>>>>> than nVidia. Unless you want a Linux box that crashes every time you move
>>>>> the mouse pointer.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Try Matrox, for starters. And then you may provide the URLs to tis multitude
>>>> of msgs which talk about crashes when you move the mouse pointer. Don't
>>>> forget, OS should be linux, not windows
>>>
>>> Agreed Matrox have always had great GNU/Linux support, open too!
>> 
>> 
>> Is the whole driver open-source?  I just did a quick search and found
>> one Matrox driver where only the basic 2D support is open, and a closed
>> source component is used for extended capabilities.  On the main
>> website, Matrox also provides their drivers only in an rpm package which
>> makes me suspect that its a binary driver only for the listed version of
>> RedHat.  NVIDIA's drivers can be used on almost any distribution since
>> you compile the driver yourself.  Correct me if I'm wrong, I can't look
>> at their drivers because you have to be a registered user to be allowed
>> to download them, but I would be real surprised to find *any*
>> manufacturer of a modern 3D hardware-accelerated video card
>> open-sourcing the *whole* driver.
>
> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)


:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
works.
0
EdCogburn (227)
11/20/2003 1:22:13 PM
Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
> 
> 
>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
> works.

Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
protect here.

To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.

My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
fan and that card is a must have!

The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
their card really is.


-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/20/2003 8:42:00 PM
Terry wrote:

> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
> 
>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>> 
>> 
>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>> works.
> 
> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
> protect here.
> 
> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
> 
> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
> fan and that card is a must have!
> 
> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
> their card really is.
> 

I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
engine runs.

-- 
COMPUTER POWER TO THE PEOPLE! DOWN WITH CYBERCRUD!
0
paul_cooke (974)
11/20/2003 9:41:10 PM
paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> Terry wrote:
> 
>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>  and this is what they wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>>> 
>>> 
>>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>>> works.
>> 
>> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
>> protect here.
>> 
>> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
>> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
>> 
>> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
>> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
>> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
>> fan and that card is a must have!
>> 
>> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
>> their card really is.
>> 
> 
> I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
> with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
> different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
> merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
> engine runs.

You too huh ?

My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.

The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!

Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
card is going to max out my P4 ?

When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.

-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/21/2003 12:26:43 AM
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:26:43 +1100, Terry wrote:

> paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
> 
>> Terry wrote:
>> 
>>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>>>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>>>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>>>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>>>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>>>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>>>> works.
>>> 
>>> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
>>> protect here.
>>> 
>>> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
>>> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
>>> 
>>> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
>>> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
>>> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
>>> fan and that card is a must have!
>>> 
>>> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
>>> their card really is.
>>> 
>> 
>> I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
>> with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
>> different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
>> merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
>> engine runs.
> 
> You too huh ?
> 
> My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.
> 
> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
> 
> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
> card is going to max out my P4 ?
> 
> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.

*shakes head sadly*

You guys really need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking. First
Microsoft, and now the Evil NVIDIA. What's next? The Evil Ben & Jerry's?

BTW: Try running it on Windows XP. 1.4GHz AMD Athlon, Geforce 4. Running
the DXDiag tests, I get CPU usage of < 10%.

Sounds like a flaw in Linux to me.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/21/2003 9:36:32 AM
On 2003-11-21, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
> paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
>
>> Terry wrote:
>> 
>>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>>>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>>>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>>>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>>>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>>>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>>>> works.
>>> 
>>> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
>>> protect here.
>>> 
>>> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
>>> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
>>> 
>>> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
>>> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
>>> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
>>> fan and that card is a must have!
>>> 
>>> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
>>> their card really is.
>>> 
>> 
>> I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
>> with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
>> different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
>> merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
>> engine runs.
>
> You too huh ?
>
> My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.
>
> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!


What were you doing when it was taking 60% of the CPU?


>
> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>
> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.


As for there being no voodoo, I don't know.  128 bit floating point
color precision, early Z occlusion culling, displacement mapping,
adaptive tessellation, pixel/vertex shading, etc, etc.  The level of
complexity has reached the point where we now have compilers for
"graphics languages".  Just read one of the recent articles about the
NV30 or R300 chips and all the graphical transformations they can do.
If it were just a matter of pushing bits faster, we wouldn't need GPU's
running so hot they need their own cooler fan, and with die sizes
rivaling those of last generation's CPUs.  GPUs are literally becoming
programmable processors in the same sense as a CPU with multiple,
parallel rendering pipelines just like the multiple execution pipelines
and ALUs in modern CPUs.  That is a level of sophisitication far beyond
simply building a wide pipe.  If you think graphics processing is
simple, just try this for a snack:

http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/peercy00interactive.html

The above is referenced from this report:

http://www.tech-report.com/etc/2002q3/nextgen-gpus/index.x?pg=1



When it comes to faster-faster-faster, I think we've reached a
practicality limit though.  The latest NVIDIA card is running so fast,
the fan it needs to cool itself is much louder than the fans of many
computer cases.  In turn, the same is true of computers in general.
What I miss most about my previous machine was how *quiet* it was.  Of
course, I'm used to the humming now, but I have already decided that
when I upgrade next, noise *will* be an important criteria.
0
EdCogburn (227)
11/21/2003 1:10:25 PM
Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

<deletia> 
>> My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.
>>
>> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
> 
> 
> What were you doing when it was taking 60% of the CPU?

Playing UT2003 or watching dvds, I can't remember now.

> 
> 
>>
>> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
>> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
>> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>>
>> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
>> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.
> 
> 
> As for there being no voodoo, I don't know.  128 bit floating point
> color precision, early Z occlusion culling, displacement mapping,
> adaptive tessellation, pixel/vertex shading, etc, etc.  The level of
> complexity has reached the point where we now have compilers for
> "graphics languages".  Just read one of the recent articles about the
> NV30 or R300 chips and all the graphical transformations they can do.
> If it were just a matter of pushing bits faster, we wouldn't need GPU's
> running so hot they need their own cooler fan, and with die sizes
> rivaling those of last generation's CPUs.  GPUs are literally becoming
> programmable processors in the same sense as a CPU with multiple,
> parallel rendering pipelines just like the multiple execution pipelines
> and ALUs in modern CPUs.  That is a level of sophisitication far beyond
> simply building a wide pipe.  If you think graphics processing is
> simple,

I certainly wouldn't say "simple", but then it can't be any more complex
than any other task involving that kind of hardware ?

>just try this for a snack:
> 
> http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/peercy00interactive.html

Looks interesting, what a well designed page!

> 
> The above is referenced from this report:
> 
> http://www.tech-report.com/etc/2002q3/nextgen-gpus/index.x?pg=1

An excellent article, thanks for posting it. My favourite part was this
one:-

Of course, the graphics chip companies have frequently pointed to
cinematic-style rendering as an eventual goal. NVIDIA's Jen-Hsun Huang
said at the launch of the GeForce2 that the chip was a "major step toward
achieving" the goal of "Pixar-level animation in real-time". But partisans
of high-end animations tools have derided the chip companies' ambitious
plans, as Tom Duff of Pixar did in reaction to Huang's comments at the
GeForce2 launch. Duff wrote:
	
`Pixar-level animation' runs about 8 hundred thousand times slower
than real-time on our renderfarm cpus. (I'm guessing. There's about
1000 cpus in the renderfarm and I guess we could produce all the frames
in TS2 in about 50 days of renderfarm time. That comes to 1.2 million
cpu hours for a 1.5 hour movie. That lags real time by a factor of 800,000.)

Do you really believe that their toy is a million times faster than
one of the cpus on our Ultra Sparc servers? What's the chance that
we wouldn't put one of these babies on every desk in the building?
They cost a couple of hundred bucks, right? Why hasn't NVIDIA tried
to give us a carton of these things? -- think of the publicity milage
[sic] they could get out of it! 
.........................................

I guess the above quote sums up my feeling pretty well about graphic
cards. They're not there yet, and won't be for another 20 years. I hope
I won't be too senile to appreciate it when they are tho!

> 
> When it comes to faster-faster-faster, I think we've reached a
> practicality limit though.

That's unfortunate for the manufacturers, it now means the brightest box
will win!

> The latest NVIDIA card is running so fast,
> the fan it needs to cool itself is much louder than the fans of many
> computer cases.  In turn, the same is true of computers in general.
> What I miss most about my previous machine was how *quiet* it was.  Of
> course, I'm used to the humming now, but I have already decided that
> when I upgrade next, noise *will* be an important criteria.

Agreed, I've been meaning to make up some water cooling adaptors for my
pcs for ages (I'm fortunate to have a good machine shop available).

I think the gurgle of water would be far preferable to high speed fans
that only clog everything up with dust anyway.


-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/21/2003 8:06:03 PM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:36:32 GMT,
 Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:26:43 +1100, Terry wrote:
>
>> paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>  and this is what they wrote:
>> 
>>> Terry wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>>>>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>>>>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>>>>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>>>>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>>>>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>>>>> works.
>>>> 
>>>> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
>>>> protect here.
>>>> 
>>>> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
>>>> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
>>>> 
>>>> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
>>>> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
>>>> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
>>>> fan and that card is a must have!
>>>> 
>>>> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
>>>> their card really is.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
>>> with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
>>> different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
>>> merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
>>> engine runs.
>> 
>> You too huh ?
>> 
>> My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.
>> 
>> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
>> 
>> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
>> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
>> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>> 
>> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
>> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.
>
> *shakes head sadly*
>
> You guys really need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking. First
> Microsoft, and now the Evil NVIDIA. What's next? The Evil Ben & Jerry's?
>
> BTW: Try running it on Windows XP. 1.4GHz AMD Athlon, Geforce 4. Running
> the DXDiag tests, I get CPU usage of < 10%.
>
> Sounds like a flaw in Linux to me.


Is that like the MICROS~1 "resources" meter that ignores the resources
used by the OS, and tells you lies about what your machine is doing? 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/vrSKd90bcYOAWPYRAjtxAJ9XXT6Dli5SWNjgJ4oJMOSDUvXHNgCeKmdP
3SayHP30I5nbPlA1kM35tc4=
=lVts
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"Black holes are where God divided by zero".
0
warlock (9522)
11/22/2003 12:57:46 AM
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:57:46 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:36:32 GMT,
>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:26:43 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>
>>> paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Terry wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>>>>>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>>>>>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>>>>>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>>>>>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>>>>>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>>>>>> works.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
>>>>> protect here.
>>>>> 
>>>>> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
>>>>> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
>>>>> 
>>>>> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
>>>>> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
>>>>> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
>>>>> fan and that card is a must have!
>>>>> 
>>>>> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
>>>>> their card really is.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
>>>> with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
>>>> different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
>>>> merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
>>>> engine runs.
>>> 
>>> You too huh ?
>>> 
>>> My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.
>>> 
>>> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
>>> 
>>> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
>>> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
>>> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>>> 
>>> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
>>> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.
>>
>> *shakes head sadly*
>>
>> You guys really need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking. First
>> Microsoft, and now the Evil NVIDIA. What's next? The Evil Ben & Jerry's?
>>
>> BTW: Try running it on Windows XP. 1.4GHz AMD Athlon, Geforce 4. Running
>> the DXDiag tests, I get CPU usage of < 10%.
>>
>> Sounds like a flaw in Linux to me.
> 
> 
> Is that like the MICROS~1 "resources" meter that ignores the resources
> used by the OS, and tells you lies about what your machine is doing? 

Which one's that? Because I've not got one of those.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/22/2003 3:55:46 AM
Jim Richardson threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:36:32 GMT,
>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:26:43 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>
>>> paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Terry wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>>>>>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>>>>>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>>>>>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>>>>>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>>>>>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>>>>>> works.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
>>>>> protect here.
>>>>> 
>>>>> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
>>>>> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
>>>>> 
>>>>> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
>>>>> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
>>>>> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
>>>>> fan and that card is a must have!
>>>>> 
>>>>> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
>>>>> their card really is.
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
>>>> with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
>>>> different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
>>>> merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
>>>> engine runs.
>>> 
>>> You too huh ?
>>> 
>>> My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.
>>> 
>>> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
>>> 
>>> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
>>> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
>>> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>>> 
>>> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
>>> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.
>>
>> *shakes head sadly*
>>
>> You guys really need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking. First
>> Microsoft, and now the Evil NVIDIA. What's next? The Evil Ben & Jerry's?
>>
>> BTW: Try running it on Windows XP. 1.4GHz AMD Athlon, Geforce 4. Running
>> the DXDiag tests, I get CPU usage of < 10%.
>>
>> Sounds like a flaw in Linux to me.
> 
> 
> Is that like the MICROS~1 "resources" meter that ignores the resources
> used by the OS, and tells you lies about what your machine is doing? 

Hahahahah.

My cpu meter shows 0% at the moment, I've got 10 Virtual desktops and
I'm playing mp3's.

top - 15:40:05 up 27 days,  6:39, 20 users,  load average: 0.06, 0.03, 0.01

Tasks: 194 total,   1 running, 193 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
Cpu(s):   0.3% user,   0.7% system,   0.0% nice,  99.0% idle
Mem:    256520k total,   240020k used,    16500k free,    18548k buffers
Swap:   979956k total,   415856k used,   564100k free,    89400k cached

-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/22/2003 4:36:59 AM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 03:55:46 GMT,
 Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:57:46 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:36:32 GMT,
>>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:26:43 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>>
>>>> paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Terry wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>>>>>>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>>>>>>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>>>>>>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>>>>>>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>>>>>>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>>>>>>> works.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
>>>>>> protect here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
>>>>>> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
>>>>>> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
>>>>>> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
>>>>>> fan and that card is a must have!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
>>>>>> their card really is.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
>>>>> with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
>>>>> different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
>>>>> merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
>>>>> engine runs.
>>>> 
>>>> You too huh ?
>>>> 
>>>> My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.
>>>> 
>>>> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
>>>> 
>>>> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
>>>> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
>>>> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>>>> 
>>>> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
>>>> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.
>>>
>>> *shakes head sadly*
>>>
>>> You guys really need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking. First
>>> Microsoft, and now the Evil NVIDIA. What's next? The Evil Ben & Jerry's?
>>>
>>> BTW: Try running it on Windows XP. 1.4GHz AMD Athlon, Geforce 4. Running
>>> the DXDiag tests, I get CPU usage of < 10%.
>>>
>>> Sounds like a flaw in Linux to me.
>> 
>> 
>> Is that like the MICROS~1 "resources" meter that ignores the resources
>> used by the OS, and tells you lies about what your machine is doing? 
>
> Which one's that? Because I've not got one of those.
Standard on on the W9X series, dunno if it's been fixed since then. But
it ignored the memory that Windows used, and would report XX% used, but
only calculated that % from applications rather than the OS. 

Pretty lame really. Nothing as useful as top, or even wmmon, which gives
me a nice, accurate, visual representation of how my machine is doing,
load wise. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/vvdvd90bcYOAWPYRApfhAJ91Ky8s/AJfnx9d7CHq72Y+CXaEogCg8egB
X8rxEQ+0d8nZ5xQiXhC2oxw=
=iYmS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
Next week, a doctor with a flashlight
 shows us where Microsoft comments on OSS come from
0
warlock (9522)
11/22/2003 5:43:11 AM
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:36:59 +1100, Terry wrote:

> Jim Richardson threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
> 
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:36:32 GMT,
>>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:26:43 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>>
>>>> paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Terry wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>>>>>>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>>>>>>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>>>>>>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>>>>>>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>>>>>>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>>>>>>> works.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
>>>>>> protect here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
>>>>>> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
>>>>>> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
>>>>>> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
>>>>>> fan and that card is a must have!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
>>>>>> their card really is.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
>>>>> with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
>>>>> different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
>>>>> merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
>>>>> engine runs.
>>>> 
>>>> You too huh ?
>>>> 
>>>> My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.
>>>> 
>>>> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
>>>> 
>>>> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
>>>> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
>>>> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>>>> 
>>>> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
>>>> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.
>>>
>>> *shakes head sadly*
>>>
>>> You guys really need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking. First
>>> Microsoft, and now the Evil NVIDIA. What's next? The Evil Ben & Jerry's?
>>>
>>> BTW: Try running it on Windows XP. 1.4GHz AMD Athlon, Geforce 4. Running
>>> the DXDiag tests, I get CPU usage of < 10%.
>>>
>>> Sounds like a flaw in Linux to me.
>> 
>> 
>> Is that like the MICROS~1 "resources" meter that ignores the resources
>> used by the OS, and tells you lies about what your machine is doing? 
> 
> Hahahahah.
> 
> My cpu meter shows 0% at the moment, I've got 10 Virtual desktops and
> I'm playing mp3's.

So you were lying about the amount of CPU resources your Geforce 4 is
taking up?

Figures.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/22/2003 6:04:39 AM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:36:59 +1100,
 Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
> Jim Richardson threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:36:32 GMT,
>>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:26:43 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>>
>>>> paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Terry wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>>>>>>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>>>>>>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>>>>>>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>>>>>>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>>>>>>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>>>>>>> works.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
>>>>>> protect here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
>>>>>> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
>>>>>> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
>>>>>> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
>>>>>> fan and that card is a must have!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
>>>>>> their card really is.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
>>>>> with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
>>>>> different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
>>>>> merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
>>>>> engine runs.
>>>> 
>>>> You too huh ?
>>>> 
>>>> My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.
>>>> 
>>>> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
>>>> 
>>>> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
>>>> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
>>>> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>>>> 
>>>> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
>>>> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.
>>>
>>> *shakes head sadly*
>>>
>>> You guys really need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking. First
>>> Microsoft, and now the Evil NVIDIA. What's next? The Evil Ben & Jerry's?
>>>
>>> BTW: Try running it on Windows XP. 1.4GHz AMD Athlon, Geforce 4. Running
>>> the DXDiag tests, I get CPU usage of < 10%.
>>>
>>> Sounds like a flaw in Linux to me.
>> 
>> 
>> Is that like the MICROS~1 "resources" meter that ignores the resources
>> used by the OS, and tells you lies about what your machine is doing? 
>
> Hahahahah.
>
> My cpu meter shows 0% at the moment, I've got 10 Virtual desktops and
> I'm playing mp3's.
>
> top - 15:40:05 up 27 days,  6:39, 20 users,  load average: 0.06, 0.03, 0.01
>
> Tasks: 194 total,   1 running, 193 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
> Cpu(s):   0.3% user,   0.7% system,   0.0% nice,  99.0% idle
> Mem:    256520k total,   240020k used,    16500k free,    18548k buffers
> Swap:   979956k total,   415856k used,   564100k free,    89400k cached
>


 11:31pm  up 140 days,  8:55,  1 user,  load average: 1.24, 1.14, 1.19
103 processes: 102 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
CPU0 states: 29.4% user,  2.1% system,  0.0% nice, 67.3% idle
CPU1 states: 28.3% user,  4.4% system,  0.0% nice, 66.2% idle
CPU2 states: 32.0% user,  4.1% system,  0.0% nice, 63.3% idle
CPU3 states: 28.3% user,  2.3% system,  0.0% nice, 68.2% idle
Mem:  1030560K av, 1012236K used,   18324K free,       0K shrd,   98240K buff
Swap: 2048276K av,    6328K used, 2041948K free                  778728K cached

Serving between 8 and 9 million hits a day, pretty quiet right now
though :) Dang, I like P4 hyperthreading. 

Gotta love that swap usage, <7M...

Just got a couple new servers for a client, now setting them up. They're
hosted, and the hosting company really messed up the installs in minor
ways (ext2? get real...) but it's fun playing with someone elses
equipment, on their dime. 


And I have a pentab sitting at the office now, that will roll over
497 days uptime sometime tomorrow. That's kinda cool too. 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/vv6md90bcYOAWPYRAseaAJ0TG3mnISW6yHcq/Hgte7mpQeeRvACgoUZQ
XLZ4jeltwos4F74WRgvk1cQ=
=w/Mz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
"Even if you can deceive people about a product through misleading statements,
sooner or later the product will speak for itself." - Hajime Karatsu
0
warlock (9522)
11/22/2003 6:13:58 AM
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:43:11 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 03:55:46 GMT,
>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:57:46 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>> 
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:36:32 GMT,
>>>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 11:26:43 +1100, Terry wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Terry wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>>>>>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 2003-11-19, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Oh oh, you haven't forgiven me for our last argument have you ? ;-)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>:)  Actually, I wasn't even paying attention to who wrote what I was
>>>>>>>> responding to.  I'm using NVIDIA with its part-open, part-closed driver,
>>>>>>>> and am very interested to find any manufacterer producing fully open
>>>>>>>> source drivers, because I'll buy their product if they do, but frankly,
>>>>>>>> I'm not expecting to ever see that.  Hardware makers simply do not want
>>>>>>>> to show their competition the dirty little details of how their hardware
>>>>>>>> works.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Yeah that seems to be the norm. As tho there are some *big secrets* to
>>>>>>> protect here.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> To me it's all just electronics, I design everyday and there is no
>>>>>>> magic, no dark voodoo, just science and data.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
>>>>>>> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
>>>>>>> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
>>>>>>> fan and that card is a must have!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
>>>>>>> their card really is.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I'm strongly suspecting each new version of a card is really the same card
>>>>>> with a diferent graphic and a different "secret" setting that enables a
>>>>>> different speed and that everytime they launch a new driver set, it's
>>>>>> merely a fresh set of clocking tables to control how fast the internal
>>>>>> engine runs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> You too huh ?
>>>>> 
>>>>> My Nvidia Geforce2 runs quite fast, and hardly uses *any* cpu.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
>>>>> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
>>>>> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>>>>> 
>>>>> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
>>>>> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.
>>>>
>>>> *shakes head sadly*
>>>>
>>>> You guys really need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking. First
>>>> Microsoft, and now the Evil NVIDIA. What's next? The Evil Ben & Jerry's?
>>>>
>>>> BTW: Try running it on Windows XP. 1.4GHz AMD Athlon, Geforce 4. Running
>>>> the DXDiag tests, I get CPU usage of < 10%.
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like a flaw in Linux to me.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Is that like the MICROS~1 "resources" meter that ignores the resources
>>> used by the OS, and tells you lies about what your machine is doing? 
>>
>> Which one's that? Because I've not got one of those.
> Standard on on the W9X series, dunno if it's been fixed since then. But
> it ignored the memory that Windows used, and would report XX% used, but
> only calculated that % from applications rather than the OS. 
> 
> Pretty lame really. Nothing as useful as top, or even wmmon, which gives
> me a nice, accurate, visual representation of how my machine is doing,
> load wise. 

Here's what you get on Windows 2000 / XP. I didn't turn on all of the
performance data columns. Just a few of them.

http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr.png
http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr2.png

Yes, the Windows 95 one sucked ass.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/22/2003 6:18:55 AM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 06:18:55 GMT,
 Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:43:11 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>> 
>> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 03:55:46 GMT,
>>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>
>>> Which one's that? Because I've not got one of those.
>> Standard on on the W9X series, dunno if it's been fixed since then. But
>> it ignored the memory that Windows used, and would report XX% used, but
>> only calculated that % from applications rather than the OS. 
>> 
>> Pretty lame really. Nothing as useful as top, or even wmmon, which gives
>> me a nice, accurate, visual representation of how my machine is doing,
>> load wise. 
>
> Here's what you get on Windows 2000 / XP. I didn't turn on all of the
> performance data columns. Just a few of them.
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr.png
> http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr2.png
>

Not too bad I suppose. Not a patch on gkrellm, or Moodss, or even gps,
but not bad.

For MICROS~1 :)



> Yes, the Windows 95 one sucked ass.

yeah, it lied, that was a bad thing. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/vwwKd90bcYOAWPYRAqvgAKDWXwsQOH6cio/5wswEA0acKi7LCACg3668
rY01KBhpk0te8S9nUBDGE4Y=
=dbvt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
I have an understanding with my local police--I have them outgunned, but
they have me outnumbered.
0
warlock (9522)
11/22/2003 7:11:06 AM
Terry wrote:

> Hahahahah.
> 
> My cpu meter shows 0% at the moment, I've got 10 Virtual desktops and
> I'm playing mp3's.

got two gkrellms running on this desktop, one showing this box, the other
showing whats going on on my samba server...

Both boxes maxed out with setiahome clients running at -nice 19... but both
very responsive. Unfortunately, I do have to stop the seticlient on this
box when I want to listen to mp3/oggs cos I get a horrible aural effect if
I don't (low chopping/buzzing noise every five seconds or so when the
seticlient and the audio have a little argument). From what I hear, the 2.6
kernel should eliminate this problem.

This Susy 8.2 box

top - 08:44:42 up 1 day, 18:52,  4 users,  load average: 1.09, 1.19, 1.17
Tasks: 103 total,   5 running,  98 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
Cpu(s):   4.9% user,   6.9% system,  88.2% nice,   0.0% idle
Mem:    255768k total,   251756k used,     4012k free,    28076k buffers
Swap:  1028112k total,    98988k used,   929124k free,    68592k cached

and the samba box with Mandy 9.2

top - 08:46:55 up 1 day, 12:03,  1 user,  load average: 1.06, 1.00, 0.91
Tasks:  87 total,   4 running,  83 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
Cpu(s):   5.3% user,   1.3% system,  93.4% nice,   0.0% idle
Mem:    126124k total,   121616k used,     4508k free,    11736k buffers
Swap:   248968k total,    45936k used,   203032k free,    43624k cached

(must get more ram for this box... but it's RAMBUS and is getting hard to
get, shops round here don't carry it)

uptimes crap cos I had both boxes down to move them and for a good cleaning,
inside and out.

Is it safe to unplug a keyboard whilst system powered up to clean it and
then plug it back in??? never had this problem with ms-windows cos the
machine was guaranteed to be in need of a shutdown at least once a day...

the P100 smoothie's doing well...

8:50am up 38 days, 23:45, 0 users, load average: 0.17, 0.09, 0.08

-- 
COMPUTER POWER TO THE PEOPLE! DOWN WITH CYBERCRUD!
0
paul_cooke (974)
11/22/2003 9:00:33 AM
Milo T. threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

>>>>> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
>>>>> 
>>>>> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
>>>>> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
>>>>> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>>>>> 
>>>>> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
>>>>> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.
>>>>
>>>> *shakes head sadly*
>>>>
>>>> You guys really need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking. First
>>>> Microsoft, and now the Evil NVIDIA. What's next? The Evil Ben & Jerry's?
>>>>
>>>> BTW: Try running it on Windows XP. 1.4GHz AMD Athlon, Geforce 4. Running
>>>> the DXDiag tests, I get CPU usage of < 10%.
>>>>
>>>> Sounds like a flaw in Linux to me.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Is that like the MICROS~1 "resources" meter that ignores the resources
>>> used by the OS, and tells you lies about what your machine is doing? 
>> 
>> Hahahahah.
>> 
>> My cpu meter shows 0% at the moment, I've got 10 Virtual desktops and
>> I'm playing mp3's.
> 
> So you were lying about the amount of CPU resources your Geforce 4 is
> taking up?

No the 30% figure was under load, playing a dvd or UT2000. The system
has almost no load at the moment, plus I've a new nvidia driver so that
may have reduced it further.


> 
> Figures.

Your big assignment is to catch me lying hey Simon ?

Try harder!


-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/22/2003 9:48:10 AM
On 2003-11-21, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
>
> Playing UT2003 or watching dvds, I can't remember now.


[OT] Is UT2003 any good as a single player app?  I mean, for someone who
isn't interested in multiplayer, internet play, is it worth getting?
Quake III Arena wasn't very interesting unless you're a net player.


>> As for there being no voodoo, I don't know.  128 bit floating point
>> color precision, early Z occlusion culling, displacement mapping,
>> adaptive tessellation, pixel/vertex shading, etc, etc.  The level of
>> complexity has reached the point where we now have compilers for
>> "graphics languages".  Just read one of the recent articles about the
>> NV30 or R300 chips and all the graphical transformations they can do.
>> If it were just a matter of pushing bits faster, we wouldn't need GPU's
>> running so hot they need their own cooler fan, and with die sizes
>> rivaling those of last generation's CPUs.  GPUs are literally becoming
>> programmable processors in the same sense as a CPU with multiple,
>> parallel rendering pipelines just like the multiple execution pipelines
>> and ALUs in modern CPUs.  That is a level of sophisitication far beyond
>> simply building a wide pipe.  If you think graphics processing is
>> simple,
>
> I certainly wouldn't say "simple", but then it can't be any more complex
> than any other task involving that kind of hardware?


I was responding to the implication that every new generation of these
things just increases the width of the pipe or the clock speed, and
because of this there is no justification for closed source drivers.
The hardware is complex, doing very complex things, and therefore so is
the software driving it, and more importantly, seeing the source code of
that software would say a lot about the nature/capabilities/methods of
the hardware.  So I don't expect any maker of modern video cards to open
source their drivers, even though I would love to see it happen.


> An excellent article, thanks for posting it. My favourite part was this
> one:-
>
> Of course, the graphics chip companies have frequently pointed to
> cinematic-style rendering as an eventual goal. NVIDIA's Jen-Hsun Huang
> said at the launch of the GeForce2 that the chip was a "major step toward
> achieving" the goal of "Pixar-level animation in real-time". But partisans
> of high-end animations tools have derided the chip companies' ambitious
> plans, as Tom Duff of Pixar did in reaction to Huang's comments at the
> GeForce2 launch. Duff wrote:
> 	
> `Pixar-level animation' runs about 8 hundred thousand times slower
> than real-time on our renderfarm cpus. (I'm guessing. There's about
> 1000 cpus in the renderfarm and I guess we could produce all the frames
> in TS2 in about 50 days of renderfarm time. That comes to 1.2 million
> cpu hours for a 1.5 hour movie. That lags real time by a factor of 800,000.)
>
> Do you really believe that their toy is a million times faster than
> one of the cpus on our Ultra Sparc servers? What's the chance that
> we wouldn't put one of these babies on every desk in the building?
> They cost a couple of hundred bucks, right? Why hasn't NVIDIA tried
> to give us a carton of these things? -- think of the publicity milage
> [sic] they could get out of it! 
> ........................................
>
> I guess the above quote sums up my feeling pretty well about graphic
> cards. They're not there yet, and won't be for another 20 years. I hope
> I won't be too senile to appreciate it when they are tho!


You didn't read far enough into the article.  :)  That first url I gave
to the research paper is about a method of doing hi-res cinematic style
rendering using the specialized hardware in modern video cards, and the
possibility of this coming generation of hardware accelerated video
cards (working in tandem) doing the same job as a huge renderfarm and
doing it much faster.  We're not talking about 20 years, we're talking
something less than 5, maybe even 2!  Read the last part of that article.


>
>> 
>> When it comes to faster-faster-faster, I think we've reached a
>> practicality limit though.
>
> That's unfortunate for the manufacturers, it now means the brightest box
> will win!


Ugh, don't remind me.


>> The latest NVIDIA card is running so fast,
>> the fan it needs to cool itself is much louder than the fans of many
>> computer cases.  In turn, the same is true of computers in general.
>> What I miss most about my previous machine was how *quiet* it was.  Of
>> course, I'm used to the humming now, but I have already decided that
>> when I upgrade next, noise *will* be an important criteria.
>
> Agreed, I've been meaning to make up some water cooling adaptors for my
> pcs for ages (I'm fortunate to have a good machine shop available).
>
> I think the gurgle of water would be far preferable to high speed fans
> that only clog everything up with dust anyway.


LOL!
0
EdCogburn (227)
11/22/2003 3:06:04 PM
Fearing a spontaneous XP reboot, Jim Richardson mumbled this incantation:

>> Here's what you get on Windows 2000 / XP. I didn't turn on all of the
>> performance data columns. Just a few of them.
>>
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr.png
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr2.png

The Task Manager isn't bad. Microsoft has even taken a cue from "open
source" and made the dialog resizable.

However, in my experience with Win2000 and XP, the system can still
become somewhat unresponsive even with low CPU readings.

> Not too bad I suppose. Not a patch on gkrellm, or Moodss, or even gps,
> but not bad.
>
> For MICROS~1 :)

I use gkrellm for Windows on my XP box at work.

Here's an interesting thing to do:  I was copying a big bunch of ogg
files from my Linux laptop onto my XP box at work, so I could have some
music to listen to while cutting code.  Both boxes had gkrellm up and
running.

The network krells obviously showed the same plot.

The CPU krells looked identical in form, although the Linux krell showed
a much lower CPU usage.

What was interesting was the disk krells.  Under Linux, the disk krell
plot was of the exact same shape as the network krell plot.

Under XP, the disk krell plot basically followed the network plot, but
with this difference:  where the network plot showed a steep dropoff,
the disk plot showed an exponentially decaying curve.  In other words,
continuing disk activity.

Now, I do have one case where my Linux box (at home) is not responsive.
That is when ripping with a not-nice nice value.  This is with a 2.4 kernel.
Will repeat with a 2.6 kernel in a few weeks, when my overtime Windows
work is not clogging my pipeline.

Chris

-- 
No, I won't fix your Windows computer!
0
iso
11/22/2003 3:11:52 PM
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:42:00 +1100, Terry wrote:


> My kids scramble to get the latest cards, especially the ones with the
> biggest numbers, polygons, clocks, ram, ddr, double-ddr,
> double-double-ddr, you get the idea. Oh and throw in a bright purple
> fan and that card is a must have!

The sad truth is that the point of diminishing return is pretty low when
video cards are being considered.
IOW for basic, general computing the top of the line Nvidia/ATI whatever
isn't going to make much of a difference compared to the middle of the
line, or in some cases the bottom of the line.


However, when playing games like Quake and Unreal etc, you really need a
high end card to enjoy the games to their fullest.

For most people I suggest either a Matrox, or if they are a casual gamer a
lower end Nvidia or ATI card.
The Matrox has the clearest looking text and best color balance from what
I can tell, but the Nvidia is a good combination of office/games at a good
price.

People who stuff ATI 9800 cards in their systems and expect their general
office work to run better are wasting their money.


> The secrets they are trying to protect are more than likely, "how slow"
> their card really is.

As you know the speed of a card is not only related to the hardware but
also the driver and how well it interfaces with the operating system.


They are all trying to protect their IP.

flatfish+++

0
flatfish
11/22/2003 6:12:43 PM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 22 Nov 2003 15:06:04 GMT,
 Ed Cogburn <edcogburn@hotpop.com> wrote:
> On 2003-11-21, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>
>> Playing UT2003 or watching dvds, I can't remember now.
>
>
> [OT] Is UT2003 any good as a single player app?  I mean, for someone who
> isn't interested in multiplayer, internet play, is it worth getting?
> Quake III Arena wasn't very interesting unless you're a net player.
>
>

It is if you are interested in shooting things. :) No plotline, no story
to speak of. No socially redeeming values whatsoever :) But it's a
blast, and unlike most of the rest of the games I like (strategy, sims,
etc) you can sit down for 5min, have fun, and get back to whatever you
were doing without having to catch up on where you were in the game. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/v6fmd90bcYOAWPYRAmhHAKC4hv1tlLiyi76qBfHH2RQRTnKgFwCgt00m
A1kLXl95S/aNyhMyNesvIPQ=
=WNwg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
I have an understanding with my local police--I have them outgunned, but
they have me outnumbered.
0
warlock (9522)
11/22/2003 6:16:06 PM
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:13:58 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:

>
> Serving between 8 and 9 million hits a day, pretty quiet right now
> though :) Dang, I like P4 hyperthreading. 

What distro are you using?
Are you using an SMP kernel?

TIA

flatfish+++
0
flatfish
11/22/2003 6:36:17 PM
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 09:11:52 -0600, Lin�nut wrote:

> Fearing a spontaneous XP reboot, Jim Richardson mumbled this incantation:
> 
>>> Here's what you get on Windows 2000 / XP. I didn't turn on all of the
>>> performance data columns. Just a few of them.
>>>
>>> http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr.png
>>> http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr2.png
> 
> The Task Manager isn't bad. Microsoft has even taken a cue from "open
> source" and made the dialog resizable.

Yes, because we all know that Open Source invented resizable dialogs. What
are you smoking precisely?
 
> However, in my experience with Win2000 and XP, the system can still
> become somewhat unresponsive even with low CPU readings.

Depends on where it's stuck. Explorer seems to get stuck occasionally; I've
not worked out if it's because of 3rd party add-ins, or network conditions. 
 
>> Not too bad I suppose. Not a patch on gkrellm, or Moodss, or even gps,
>> but not bad.
>>
>> For MICROS~1 :)
> 
> I use gkrellm for Windows on my XP box at work.
> 
> Here's an interesting thing to do:  I was copying a big bunch of ogg
> files from my Linux laptop onto my XP box at work, so I could have some
> music to listen to while cutting code.  Both boxes had gkrellm up and
> running.
> 
> The network krells obviously showed the same plot.
> 
> The CPU krells looked identical in form, although the Linux krell showed
> a much lower CPU usage.
> 
> What was interesting was the disk krells.  Under Linux, the disk krell
> plot was of the exact same shape as the network krell plot.
> 
> Under XP, the disk krell plot basically followed the network plot, but
> with this difference:  where the network plot showed a steep dropoff,
> the disk plot showed an exponentially decaying curve.  In other words,
> continuing disk activity.

That's because it's reading ahead and caching the data ready for transfer. 

If you really want to dig into what it's doing, use the Performance
Monitor, and download the tools from sysinternals.com and monitor it.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/22/2003 10:56:15 PM
On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 23:11:06 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 06:18:55 GMT,
>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:43:11 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
>>
>>> 
>>> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 03:55:46 GMT,
>>>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Which one's that? Because I've not got one of those.
>>> Standard on on the W9X series, dunno if it's been fixed since then. But
>>> it ignored the memory that Windows used, and would report XX% used, but
>>> only calculated that % from applications rather than the OS. 
>>> 
>>> Pretty lame really. Nothing as useful as top, or even wmmon, which gives
>>> me a nice, accurate, visual representation of how my machine is doing,
>>> load wise. 
>>
>> Here's what you get on Windows 2000 / XP. I didn't turn on all of the
>> performance data columns. Just a few of them.
>>
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr.png
>> http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr2.png
>>
> 
> Not too bad I suppose. Not a patch on gkrellm, or Moodss, or even gps,
> but not bad.
> 
> For MICROS~1 :)

Different tools, different jobs. We were talking about the Task Manager. If
you want the full enchilada (similar to gkrellm), you use the Performance
Monitor.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/22/2003 10:59:27 PM
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 20:48:10 +1100, Terry wrote:

> Milo T. threw some tea leaves on the floor
>  and this is what they wrote:
> 
>>>>>> The Geforce 4 runs a bit faster, has ddr, and needed about 60% cpu!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Changing a kernel parameter brought it down by about half, but may have
>>>>>> also reduced the Geforce2 cpu to zero, so what's the point if a faster
>>>>>> card is going to max out my P4 ?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> When I see brilliantly coloured boxes, coloured fans and huge numbers,
>>>>>> splashed everywhere, I know I'm dealing with a marketing machine.
>>>>>
>>>>> *shakes head sadly*
>>>>>
>>>>> You guys really need to stop smoking whatever you're smoking. First
>>>>> Microsoft, and now the Evil NVIDIA. What's next? The Evil Ben & Jerry's?
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW: Try running it on Windows XP. 1.4GHz AMD Athlon, Geforce 4. Running
>>>>> the DXDiag tests, I get CPU usage of < 10%.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sounds like a flaw in Linux to me.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Is that like the MICROS~1 "resources" meter that ignores the resources
>>>> used by the OS, and tells you lies about what your machine is doing? 
>>> 
>>> Hahahahah.
>>> 
>>> My cpu meter shows 0% at the moment, I've got 10 Virtual desktops and
>>> I'm playing mp3's.
>> 
>> So you were lying about the amount of CPU resources your Geforce 4 is
>> taking up?
> 
> No the 30% figure was under load, playing a dvd or UT2000. The system
> has almost no load at the moment, plus I've a new nvidia driver so that
> may have reduced it further.

When playing a DVD, CPU usage is a mixture of all kinds of things. MPEG
decoding. Data streaming. Transfer of images to and from memory. Predictive
and interpolative frame generation, storing up to 12 image frames at a
time. Checking the stream for inaccuracies/bad reads and recovery. Dolby
sound decoding and down-mixing to stereo. Sometimes the GPU can help you
out with this - but it can't really help out much until you get the data in
a format it can either help decompress, transform into RGB from YUV, or
handling scaling and interlacing. Most DVD playback is *not* handled by the
GPU.

Similarly with UT2000; the GPU doesn't do much work. From the sound of it,
UT wasn't recognizing the driver, and was pushing a lot of the lighting
work over to the CPU. UT also has a lot of overdraw because it uses a lot
of portal rendering, and can't always mesh the BSP trees.

>> Figures.
> 
> Your big assignment is to catch me lying hey Simon ?
> 
> Try harder!

No, it's to make you be specific when you're laying claims against others,
whether that be people, companies, manufacturers or whatever.

Seems to be working.
0
fantastical (2319)
11/22/2003 11:05:12 PM
paul cooke threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:
<deletia> 

> Is it safe to unplug a keyboard whilst system powered up to clean it and
> then plug it back in???

Of course.

I just did that not 5 minutes ago to my wifes GNU/Linux box so she
could clean the keys etc.

<deletia> 

-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/22/2003 11:54:27 PM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 18:36:17 GMT,
 flatfish+++ <flatfish+++@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:13:58 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>>
>> Serving between 8 and 9 million hits a day, pretty quiet right now
>> though :) Dang, I like P4 hyperthreading. 
>
> What distro are you using?
> Are you using an SMP kernel?
>
> TIA
>
> flatfish+++

Right now, it's running a pretty stock RH 7.3, with RH's SMP 2.4.18
kernel. Works great. I'd convert it to Debian, but until I have some
problems with RH on it, there's no point. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/wDwRd90bcYOAWPYRAmA4AJ97H5hySMVeeGpRYhHhJheiitdKDgCglRVY
CbgRWzayEjYXz+lSfclCPQY=
=4CEE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
I never really understood how there could be things that would drive
 you insane just because you knew them until I ran into Windows. 
	--Peter da Silva in ASR
0
warlock (9522)
11/23/2003 4:48:17 AM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 22:59:27 GMT,
 Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 23:11:06 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> 
>> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 06:18:55 GMT,
>>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:43:11 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
>>>
>>>> 
>>>> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 03:55:46 GMT,
>>>>  Milo T. <fantastical@malaprop.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Which one's that? Because I've not got one of those.
>>>> Standard on on the W9X series, dunno if it's been fixed since then. But
>>>> it ignored the memory that Windows used, and would report XX% used, but
>>>> only calculated that % from applications rather than the OS. 
>>>> 
>>>> Pretty lame really. Nothing as useful as top, or even wmmon, which gives
>>>> me a nice, accurate, visual representation of how my machine is doing,
>>>> load wise. 
>>>
>>> Here's what you get on Windows 2000 / XP. I didn't turn on all of the
>>> performance data columns. Just a few of them.
>>>
>>> http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr.png
>>> http://home.earthlink.net/~simoncooke/taskmgr2.png
>>>
>> 
>> Not too bad I suppose. Not a patch on gkrellm, or Moodss, or even gps,
>> but not bad.
>> 
>> For MICROS~1 :)
>
> Different tools, different jobs. We were talking about the Task Manager. If
> you want the full enchilada (similar to gkrellm), you use the Performance
> Monitor.


gps is the same thing, as the "task manager" Gkrellm and Moodss are far
more of course, far more than the perfomance manager for that matter. 

But a really underrated remote monitoring tool, is Siag, you can embed
just about anything in the grid. 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/wDyOd90bcYOAWPYRAuuGAJwKouuLVZp1eTMbhD1PmpPvz2esBACgx9Jy
JVS0G5y4RSV3GvoNEWHhRyk=
=1fEH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
There is no limit to stupidity. Space itself is said to be bounded
 by its own curvature, but stupidity continues beyond infinity.
        -- Gene Wolfe
0
warlock (9522)
11/23/2003 4:50:22 AM
On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 20:48:17 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:

> 
> Right now, it's running a pretty stock RH 7.3, with RH's SMP 2.4.18
> kernel. Works great. I'd convert it to Debian, but until I have some
> problems with RH on it, there's no point. 
> 

Thanks for the information.


flatfish+++
0
flatfish
11/23/2003 3:54:19 PM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:54:19 GMT,
 flatfish+++ <flatfish+++@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 20:48:17 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
>
>> 
>> Right now, it's running a pretty stock RH 7.3, with RH's SMP 2.4.18
>> kernel. Works great. I'd convert it to Debian, but until I have some
>> problems with RH on it, there's no point. 
>> 
>
> Thanks for the information.
>
>

np,

Like I said, it's a server, so no X, no extraneous stuff, doesn't even
have the gcc toolchain (with a couple of exceptions, make and bison are
there I think) 



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/wQJPd90bcYOAWPYRAqA5AJ9QW9OEnGZCh0oB4cv+V5P7rGc6MACeJDCg
LKMnXLVRFkpgTjHTPpk3PBo=
=6FuY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Jim Richardson     http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock
When the DM smiles, it's already too late.
0
warlock (9522)
11/23/2003 6:54:07 PM
Milo T. wrote in <gkicnq28lgwg$.v361d3iiffp6$@fanatastical.malaprop.net> at
November 19, 2003 03:38 am
> 
> If that's the case, Terry, then please tell me of an off-the-shelf,
> commonly available, high quality, high performance graphics card
> manufacturer with better support for Linux.
> 
ATI.
Although the question was not addressed to me...

-- 
Windows = A 32 bit extension to a GUI shell to a 16 bit patch to an 
8 bit OS originally coded for a 4 bit microprocessor and sold by a 
2 bit company that can't stand 1 bit of competition.
LGX = A true 64 bit OS, running on HW from wrist-watch to mainframes.
0
abuse2422 (57)
11/24/2003 3:50:42 AM
Ian Amuhton wrote:
> Milo T. wrote in <gkicnq28lgwg$.v361d3iiffp6$@fanatastical.malaprop.net> at
> November 19, 2003 03:38 am
> 
>>If that's the case, Terry, then please tell me of an off-the-shelf,
>>commonly available, high quality, high performance graphics card
>>manufacturer with better support for Linux.
>>
> 
> ATI.
> Although the question was not addressed to me...
> 

With the high performance kernel and X graphics are less
dependent on the video card and more on the cpu.  This is
what's frightening the card manufacturer's who are dependent
on the video inefficiencies of LoseDOS.

Case in point, I bought a book on SDL ( after Simon COoke
recommended me to SDL) for Linux gaming.  The examples are in
c++, but are compilable in vc++ or g++.  they come compiled as
windows *.exes with the SDL.dll on the CD disk that is with the
book.

Similar SDL programs that are run on both my LoseDOS 1900 machine
and rh 9 run significantly slower on LOSEDOS.  It's visually obvious!

A program which generates a series of overlay multicolored squares of
random sizes ( looks like a Mondrian painting) runs hypnotically
fast on rh9 -- and papably sluggish on LoseDOS1900.


0
jabailo2 (6594)
11/24/2003 4:05:13 AM
Fearing a spontaneous XP reboot, John Bailo mumbled this incantation:

> With the high performance kernel and X graphics are less
> dependent on the video card and more on the cpu.  This is
> what's frightening the card manufacturer's who are dependent
> on the video inefficiencies of LoseDOS.
>
> Case in point, I bought a book on SDL ( after Simon COoke
> recommended me to SDL) for Linux gaming.  The examples are in
> c++, but are compilable in vc++ or g++.  they come compiled as
> windows *.exes with the SDL.dll on the CD disk that is with the
> book.
>
> Similar SDL programs that are run on both my LoseDOS 1900 machine
> and rh 9 run significantly slower on LOSEDOS.  It's visually obvious!
>
> A program which generates a series of overlay multicolored squares of
> random sizes ( looks like a Mondrian painting) runs hypnotically
> fast on rh9 -- and papably sluggish on LoseDOS1900.

Apparently this is a big reason why Hollywood studios are dumping NT and
are moving on Linux like a chicken on a june bug.

-- 
No, I won't fix your Windows computer!
0
iso
11/24/2003 12:24:45 PM
flatfish+++ <flatfish+++@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:13:58 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:

>>
>> Serving between 8 and 9 million hits a day, pretty quiet right now
>> though :) Dang, I like P4 hyperthreading. 

> What distro are you using?
> Are you using an SMP kernel?

If he wasn't, he'd only see one CPU.
0
spike1 (8171)
11/24/2003 1:55:36 PM
On Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:55:36 +0000, spike1 wrote:

> flatfish+++ <flatfish+++@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:13:58 -0800, Jim Richardson wrote:
> 
>>>
>>> Serving between 8 and 9 million hits a day, pretty quiet right now
>>> though :) Dang, I like P4 hyperthreading. 
> 
>> What distro are you using?
>> Are you using an SMP kernel?
> 
> If he wasn't, he'd only see one CPU.

Yea, I figured that one out when I started gkrellm :)
flatfish+++
0
flatfish
11/24/2003 4:07:46 PM
Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
 and this is what they wrote:

Sorry about the late reply Ed, I've been pretty busy lately.

> On 2003-11-21, Terry <tjporter@gronk.porter.net> wrote:
>> Ed Cogburn threw some tea leaves on the floor
>>  and this is what they wrote:
>>
>> Playing UT2003 or watching dvds, I can't remember now.
> 
> 
> [OT] Is UT2003 any good as a single player app?  I mean, for someone who
> isn't interested in multiplayer, internet play, is it worth getting?
> Quake III Arena wasn't very interesting unless you're a net player

It's the same as Quake really, only good for a fre minutes of single
player rampaging. I probably play it for 5 minutes a month max.

I'm not really much of a gamer, as I find apps like FlightGear or
Celestia far more interesting myself.

> 
> 
>>> As for there being no voodoo, I don't know.  128 bit floating point
>>> color precision, early Z occlusion culling, displacement mapping,
>>> adaptive tessellation, pixel/vertex shading, etc, etc.  The level of
>>> complexity has reached the point where we now have compilers for
>>> "graphics languages".  Just read one of the recent articles about the
>>> NV30 or R300 chips and all the graphical transformations they can do.
>>> If it were just a matter of pushing bits faster, we wouldn't need GPU's
>>> running so hot they need their own cooler fan, and with die sizes
>>> rivaling those of last generation's CPUs.  GPUs are literally becoming
>>> programmable processors in the same sense as a CPU with multiple,
>>> parallel rendering pipelines just like the multiple execution pipelines
>>> and ALUs in modern CPUs.  That is a level of sophisitication far beyond
>>> simply building a wide pipe.  If you think graphics processing is
>>> simple,
>>
>> I certainly wouldn't say "simple", but then it can't be any more complex
>> than any other task involving that kind of hardware?
> 
> 
> I was responding to the implication that every new generation of these
> things just increases the width of the pipe or the clock speed, and
> because of this there is no justification for closed source drivers.
> The hardware is complex, doing very complex things, and therefore so is
> the software driving it, and more importantly, seeing the source code of
> that software would say a lot about the nature/capabilities/methods of
> the hardware.  So I don't expect any maker of modern video cards to open
> source their drivers, even though I would love to see it happen.

Agreed, tho I'm definetely no video card expert.

> 
> 
>> An excellent article, thanks for posting it. My favourite part was this
>> one:-
>>
>> Of course, the graphics chip companies have frequently pointed to
>> cinematic-style rendering as an eventual goal. NVIDIA's Jen-Hsun Huang
>> said at the launch of the GeForce2 that the chip was a "major step toward
>> achieving" the goal of "Pixar-level animation in real-time". But partisans
>> of high-end animations tools have derided the chip companies' ambitious
>> plans, as Tom Duff of Pixar did in reaction to Huang's comments at the
>> GeForce2 launch. Duff wrote:
>> 	
>> `Pixar-level animation' runs about 8 hundred thousand times slower
>> than real-time on our renderfarm cpus. (I'm guessing. There's about
>> 1000 cpus in the renderfarm and I guess we could produce all the frames
>> in TS2 in about 50 days of renderfarm time. That comes to 1.2 million
>> cpu hours for a 1.5 hour movie. That lags real time by a factor of 800,000.)
>>
>> Do you really believe that their toy is a million times faster than
>> one of the cpus on our Ultra Sparc servers? What's the chance that
>> we wouldn't put one of these babies on every desk in the building?
>> They cost a couple of hundred bucks, right? Why hasn't NVIDIA tried
>> to give us a carton of these things? -- think of the publicity milage
>> [sic] they could get out of it! 
>> ........................................
>>
>> I guess the above quote sums up my feeling pretty well about graphic
>> cards. They're not there yet, and won't be for another 20 years. I hope
>> I won't be too senile to appreciate it when they are tho!
> 
> 
> You didn't read far enough into the article.  :)  That first url I gave
> to the research paper is about a method of doing hi-res cinematic style
> rendering using the specialized hardware in modern video cards, and the
> possibility of this coming generation of hardware accelerated video
> cards (working in tandem) doing the same job as a huge renderfarm and
> doing it much faster.  We're not talking about 20 years, we're talking
> something less than 5, maybe even 2!  Read the last part of that article.

I'll have to do that later after my current production of level
controllers is finished :)

[...] 

Cya> 
> 
>>
>>> 
>>> When it comes to faster-faster-faster, I think we've reached a
>>> practicality limit though.
>>
>> That's unfortunate for the manufacturers, it now means the brightest box
>> will win!
> 
> 
> Ugh, don't remind me.
> 
> 
>>> The latest NVIDIA card is running so fast,
>>> the fan it needs to cool itself is much louder than the fans of many
>>> computer cases.  In turn, the same is true of computers in general.
>>> What I miss most about my previous machine was how *quiet* it was.  Of
>>> course, I'm used to the humming now, but I have already decided that
>>> when I upgrade next, noise *will* be an important criteria.
>>
>> Agreed, I've been meaning to make up some water cooling adaptors for my
>> pcs for ages (I'm fortunate to have a good machine shop available).
>>
>> I think the gurgle of water would be far preferable to high speed fans
>> that only clog everything up with dust anyway.
> 
> 
> LOL!

-- 
              Kind Regards from Terry 
    My Desktop is powered by GNU/LinuX, Gentoo-1.4_rc2   
         New Homepage: http://milkstone.d2.net.au/          
 ** Linux Registration Number: 103931,  http://counter.li.org **
0
tjporter (1034)
11/30/2003 4:24:00 AM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

PS3: doesn't come with Linux, doesn't even run Linux by default
What other cola claims have been dashed by reality? In fact, you can install on the PS3 any OS that's been designed for it. I don't expect MS to port Vista, but you never know... http://www.playstation.com/ps3-openplatform/faq.html Q. What types of "Other OSs" can be installed? A. You can install any system software that is designed to run on PLAYSTATION�3. Unfortunately we cannot provide you with specific information about what types of "Other OSs" are available because "Other OS" and the boot loader programs are produced and distributed by third-par...

[News] [Linux] Another Company Chooses Linux; Oracle's 'Linux Family' Extends Too
Columbitech Taps SUSE Linux Enterprise From Novell to Help Retailers Reach PCI Compliance and Safeguard Customer Data ,----[ Quote ] | This offering will give retailers PCI compliance by securing all | wireless devices and providing secure wireless access to the | back-end systems. `---- http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070605005558&newsLang=en Momentum continues for Oracle ,----[ Quote ] | Oracle recently announced that momentum continues to build | around the Oracle Unbreakable Linux Support Program (which includes | supp...

The Problem Isn't Linux, It's The Linux Community...
As a desktop system, Linux is decent. I don't feel it's a polished nor are the applications and hardware support as good *overall* as Windows or OSX, but for many people, Linux is a great value and certainly a decent system. So why am I not posting as a Linux advocate? The short answer is that I don't wish to be associated with the slime that passes for Linux advocates these days. Spend 30 minutes in COLA and you will see what I mean. When was the last time you saw a Linux advocate acknowledge that something other than Linux is superior at some task? Almost never happens. That's because these people are in fact a loosely organized, yet very rabid cult of sorts. They are wired to defend the mother ship, Linux, and will not buck the herd. Yet we have the so called "wintrolls" acknowledging, and in some cases, purchasing Linux based products. Android for one. Linux as a server system for another. Linux in embedded devices as another one. Linux in super computers and clusters is another good use for Linux. So how come the so called "Wintrolls" are able to acknowledge Linux's advantages in certain areas but the Linux community will NEVER ADMIT that Linux isn't a good choice in certain areas, like the desktop. Which brings me to another trait of the Linux "advocate" and that is LIEing for LIEnux. This is where the Linux advocate will simply make up stories about Linux just "working" that are clearly and easily pr...

What Linux Is Missing. And What Doesn't Work. Linux Sux.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAeDa4fZyXw Nelson Lopez wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAeDa4fZyXw Plonked, unwatched, "Nelson". Haaaaaaa haaaaaaaa. -- Psychoanalysis?? I thought this was a nude rap session!!! In reply to Chris Ahlstrom who posted: > Nelson Lopez wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAeDa4fZyXw > > Plonked, unwatched, "Nelson". Haaaaaaa haaaaaaaa. References: 94.75.214.90 Oh, the idiotic nymshifting LEASEWEB troll again. -- A)bort, R)etry, I)nfluence with large hammer. "Microsoft has vast resources, literally billions of dollars in cash, or liquid assets reserves. Microsoft is an incredibly successful empire built on the premise of market dominance with low-quality goods." -- Former White House adviser Richard A. Clarke -- William Poaster wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: > In reply to Chris Ahlstrom who posted: > >> Nelson Lopez wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties: >> >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAeDa4fZyXw >> >> Plonked, unwatched, "Nelson". Haaaaaaa haaaaaaaa. > > References: 94.75.214.90 > > Oh, the idiotic nymshifting LEASEWEB troll again. And I thought Flounder and DFS were attention-beggars. -- The chicken that clucks the loudest is the one most likely to show up...

Linux crapware victim: Mepis8 'collapsed'... webcams don't work on Ubuntu 12.04..."Don't tell me to build a kernel..."
"I need my webcam to work with flash on web pages so that I can speak to family members overseas (Kopete and suchlike). I used mepis8 for years and everything was perfect, my webcams (three different makes), printers and anything else I cared to plug in worked from the off. lovely!! Then mepis8 collapsed suddenly and nothing worked. I tried the newer mepis variants and every other linux distro that I came across to solve the problem, but nothing works. I'm now using ubuntu 12.04, because it's not windows I suppose, but it's far from what I need. Can anybody on here please tell me how to make any one of my webcams work on Ubuntu 12.04 with flash? Don't tell me it's the manufacturer's fault, because they worked on Mepis8. Don't tell me to build a kernel and add some Su (or do or sudo) and add a line et al because it's all gibberish to me. Keep it simple please. Complicated is fine as long as it's step by step or copy and paste. Unfortunately, after about 12 years on linux, I will be driven back to windows if I don't get some help. The Mepis forums used to be excellent for advice because there weren't any bigheads showing off their superior knowledge of linux on it. The Ubuntu forums seem to be the opposite, more than 1000 posts (in two threads) on why they prefer ubuntu to xp, but none of them can help me get my webcam working!!!! So this is the challenge, before ...

Does Linux get tested before it's released? It doesn't look like it.
It sure the hell doesn't look like it if the latest release of Suse 9.1 is typical. And judging by the latest release of Mandrake 10 as well it doesn't look like any testing goes on before they release these bug riddled distributions out into the wild for the unsuspecting user to troubleshoot. How on earth can Samba be broken right from the install? Samba, that great program that is supposedly faster than the Microsoft offerings. It just proves that little or no testing gets done before release. http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/showthread.php?threadid=181117 Linux is fast becoming somewhat of a huge joke. MK Mikhail Wantanabe wrote: > And judging by the latest release of Mandrake 10 as well it doesn't look > like any testing goes on before they release these bug riddled > distributions out into the wild for the unsuspecting user to > troubleshoot. And fucking microsoft is any different with windows, you duff fuck? What about all the fucking patches that break systems, left, right and centre? -- Kadaitcha Man: Registered Linux User #344402 Akhenaten: Registered Linux Machine #235500 gentoo SMP Linux Kernel 2.6.6. I roll my own. On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 01:49:24 +0000, Kadaitcha Man wrote: > Mikhail Wantanabe wrote: > >> And judging by the latest release of Mandrake 10 as well it doesn't look >> like any testing goes on before they release these bug riddled >> distributions out into the wild for the...

Can't download grsecurity 2.1.8 for Linux 2.6.14.6
Hello all. Does anyone have an idea why the grsecurity 2.1.8 download for Linux 2.6.14.6 [2] is not working? It's linked from the official download page [1]. Thanks in advance. Regards. --- [1] <http://grsecurity.com/download.php> Official grsecurity download page. [2] <http://grsecurity.com/grsecurity-2.1.8-2.6.14.6-200601211647.patch.gz> grsecurity 2.1.8 patch for Linux 2.6.14.6. ...

Linux: it's 2008 and the crapware still can't get object permissions right
"Empty folders after transfer to external hard drive -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- After a transfer of folders with content from the computers hard drive to an external hard drive, the folders turns always out to be empty on the external hard drive. Doesn't matter of I copy the folders or if I move them. Any ideas?" http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1017572 This is so typical of the user-unfriendly crapware that after 17 years still can't get object permissions right. Tells you it's copying/transferring...

[News] Linux is Linux is Linux, Not 'Cheap Windows'
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Reimagining The Desktop ,----[ Quote ] | KDE 4.1 goes a long way to solving that dilemma. `---- http://www.northdavisroad.net/2008/08/reimagining-the-desktop/ Linux should remain Linux ,----[ Quote ] | I disagree that Linux should concentrate on running native Windows apps. This | is exactly the opposite of what the community should be doing. If you notice | more and more companies are working to make Linux their base rather than | Windows. This frees them of paying tax to MS and stops MS from beating their | products with tighter Windows...

'Linux is perfect' and 'Linux is perfect for' idiocy
Straight up 'Linux is perfect' idiocy: ========================================================================= "Linux is perfect." Posted by: unknown at March 26, 2005 03:57 PM http://www.goodexperience.com/tib/archives/2005/03/apple_mail_filt.html "Linux is perfect." http://www.deadtroll.com/index2.html?/video/ossuckscable.html~content "Linux is perfect: its open source nature and excellent shell make it the ultimate hobbyist's operating system." http://www.techradar.com/news/software/applications/top-50-best-linux-apps-2011-1014373 "Linux is perfect" comment by Mr.chippy http://blenderartists.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-218660.html?s=7ca405d1beb423b9015bd2ff62fb90bb "Linux is perfect" comment by jackblack http://blenderartists.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-218660.html?s=7ca405d1beb423b9015bd2ff62fb90bb "Linux is perfect!" http://abaldwin360.tumblr.com/post/23175853511/why-do-hipsters-use-macs-linux-is-so-much-less "Linux is perfect" ..sig of LSeraphim http://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php?topic=97991.15 "Linux is perfect." Anonymous10/14/2010 03:06:00 PM http://www.techbroil.com/2010/10/linux-desktop-needs-to-bake-for-3-5.html "Linux is perfect" comment by albert http://web.archive.org/web/20080720151740/http://the-half-decent-pharmaceutical-chemistry-blog.chemblogs.org/archives/2008/01/02/all-is-quiet-on-new-y...

Can't get sound from linux-mozilla + linux-realplayer 10
Hello all, I just installed the linux-mozilla and linux-realpayer 10 ports. Everything works but the sound. I can see the video but, I can not hear anything. I use KDE so I tried using the artsdsp (thinking that maybe arts had something to do with it) but, that did not work. It gave me an ELF error about the OS. So, any idea on what I should try next? Please help! Michael Michael J. Pelletier wrote: > Hello all, > > I just installed the linux-mozilla and linux-realpayer 10 ports. > Everything works but the sound. I can see the video but, I can not hear > anything. I use KDE so I tried using the artsdsp (thinking that maybe arts > had something to do with it) but, that did not work. It gave me an ELF > error about the OS. > > So, any idea on what I should try next? Please help! > > Michael OK, I found that it was artsd. When I killed, quite violently, artsd I got the sound. Does anyone know of a way I can use a wrapper or something so I do not have to kill the daemon every time. Michael "Michael J. Pelletier" <mjpelletier@mjpelletier.com> writes: > Michael J. Pelletier wrote: > > > Hello all, > > > > I just installed the linux-mozilla and linux-realpayer 10 ports. > > Everything works but the sound. I can see the video but, I can not hear > > anything. I use KDE so I tried using the artsdsp (thinking that maybe arts > > had something t...

pppd fails with linux kernel 2-6-28.10 (Couldn't get channel)
Hi all, I was using linux kernel 2.6.22 with pppd 2.4.4 in an embedded hardware (powerpc architecture) with a GPRS serial module. I was able to make a GPRS connection, but now I've upgraded kernel version to 2-6-28.10 and pppd to 2.4.5 and it doesn't work. These are the log messages after sending the ATD*99***1# command, when pppd is started: 2000/03/21,18:51:26 daemon.warn pppd[772]: Warning: couldn't open ppp database /var/run/ppp/pppd2.tdb 2000/03/21,18:51:26 daemon.notice pppd[772]: pppd 2.4.5 started by root, uid 0 2000/03/21,18:51:26 daemon.err pppd[773]: ...

[News] Google's OEM Success with Linux Shows Why Microsoft+Their Analysts Can't Help FUDing Chrome OS
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Google names Chrome OS partners ,----[ Quote ] | Google followed up on Thursday's announcement of a Linux-based Chrome OS for | netbooks by listing nine technology partners that are supporting the | open-source platform. Meanwhile, one report claims that Intel, which is not | on the list, is collaborating with Google on Chrome OS. `---- http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS9174113805.html?kc=rss Google Chrome OS and the Open Source Desktop ,----[ Quote ] | So far, Google has showed itself to be a first-rate development shop with | projects like Gears or the Chrome Browser. However, it has been substantially | less successful at marketing and monetizing projects. While projects like | Google Earth or Street View or even Android attract all sorts of media | attention, Google has yet to wean itself away from its dependency on search | ads for its main revenue. `---- http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/features/article.php/3829406/Google-Chrome-OS-and-the-Open-Source-Desktop.htm Recent: Researcher: Chrome to boost Atom to ARM switch in netbooks ,----[ Quote ] | LONDON — Technology changes, including the introudction of the Chrome | OS, will undermine Atom's grip on the netbook market during a | recessionary time when people don't want, and can't afford, a second | laptop just to carry around say market researchers, The Information Network. | | While Intel's Atom holds more than an 80 percent ...

"Linux is so complex that even a world class software engineer can't always get it to work."
"I think you'll agree that it's fair to call Jamie Zawinski a world class software engineer." .... "For years I've had it drummed into my head that you always have to keep your systems patched, if you aren't running the latest security fixes, the script kiddies will eat you alive, running a six month old OS is like leaving your front door wide open, blah blah blah. Well you know what? F**k that noise. I'm done upgrading anything ever. The next time I get this s**t into a state that seems even remotely stable, I'm never touching it again. If we get hacked,...

[News] Linux's Own 'Dashboard' Leaps Ahead of Apple's Leopard (Not Even Released Yet)
Awn Hover effects ,----[ Quote ] | Awn has lost of cool new hover effects being created so I will demonstrate | them all here including the cpu monitor applet. | | The hover effects demonstrated in this video are: | | * Classic | * Fade | * Spotlight | * Zoom | * Squish | * 3d Turn `---- http://thelinuxmovement.blogspot.com/2007/09/awn-hover-effects.html Related: Avant Window Navigator Effects ,----[ Quote ] | The new advanced and cool effects of the great linux-dock by NJPatel... � `---- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lFhWNGtZKrg AWN 3D Turn Icon Effect Vi...

Linux: "half the s**t doesn't work."
# 78 jumbojs said, on December 1st, 2007 at 9:14 pm "Here here! I'm tired of hearing all these great things about Linux and then trying to install it and half the s**t doesn't work. What's the point if I have to spend hours trying to configure files that should work automatically. To be fair to Fedora however, it's the only distribution so far that has picked up my wireless adapter right away without any configuration. The other distro's would find it but it wouldn't work." http://www.dvorak.org/blog/?p=14453 DFS had de volgende lumineuze gedachte ...

[News] Microsoft's Linux 'Sellouts' Lose to Truly Free GNU/Linux
The World Series of Linux: Round 1 ,----[ Quote ] | But, clearly, Ubuntu shined. It has earned the right to play in the | championship round of The World Series of Linux. The next round will | determine its opponent, as the RPM Round pits SLED 10, Fedora 7 and PCLinuxOS | to compete to pick the best out of those distributions. `---- http://www.crn.com/software/204802194 Guess who lost here? Xandros and Linspire. Here is OpenSUSE losing: First Kubuntu Impressions ,----[ Quote ] | Well, seems like Kubuntu is the clear winner for professional users and also | for enthusiasts. For begi...

[News] [Linux] Dell's Linux Won't Emulate Windows, Might Go Beyond the US in Future
Ubuntu Founder: No Emulation Software for Dell Systems ,----[ Quote ] | "While Linux is an alternative to Windows, it is not cheap Windows. Linux | has its own strengths, and users should want it because of those | strengths and not because it's a cheap copy of Windows," he said. `---- http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,2125848,00.asp?kc=EWRSS03129TX1K0000616 Dell explains Linux delays ,----[ Quote ] | "We are adjusting the roadmap for the rest of the world, but this has | just not been announced yet," Greffier added. `---- http://news.zdnet.co.uk/hardware/0,1000...

[News] Man's Life's Work Centered Around GNU/Linux for Tomorrow's Generation
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Kids in Austin, Texas Need More Penguins ,----[ Quote ] | Ken's health has taken a bit of a turn and even though he will be stubborn | and continue to push himself too hard, it would be better for more people to | pitch in with Komputers4Kids. I don't know if that is still the official | name, but the job is still the same-- collect donations of good used | computers of recent vintage, install Linux on them, make sure everything | works, and deliver and set them up. `---- http://blog.linuxtoday.com/blog/2009/09/kids-in-austin.html Recent: OOo4Kids proposed as part of OpenOffice.org Project ,----[ Quote ] | Today, I proposed  OOo4Kids to become a part of OpenOffice.org Project. `---- http://eric.bachard.free.fr/news/2009/08/ooo4kids-proposed-as-part-of.html Qimo4Kids.com - Linux For Kids ,----[ Quote ] | Nowadays kids are getting more and more familiar with computers. That takes | place through games, movies, pictures and all kind of educational programs. | And now, there is a new solution for you to give your kids the possibility to | use a computer in a fun way. | | Qimo4Kids.com is a website that was specially developed in order to provide | users with all the information they need about a new operative system for | kids. This system was created as a version of Linux for kids. `---- http://www.killerstartups.com/Web20/qimo4kids-com-linux-for-kids -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1....

Can't Use Linux Anymore, It Doesn't Jerk Around Enough Like Spastic Monkeys
Why the heck doesn't this Linux installation flash on an off and jerk all over the screen, thus properly attracting my attention? I like a little interreaction from my programs. Plus it's running on only 256K Ram. What's with that? More (waaaaaaaay more) is better, Right? I'm feeling resource starved here. Those windows bozos are having all the ram MASS fun. This sucks. On 2007-08-18, flyer <flyer@there.net> wrote: > > Why the heck doesn't this Linux installation flash on an off and jerk all over the screen, thus properly attracting my attention? > &g...

Linux Loons Break Into Congressman's Office and trash PC's By Installing Linux on them.
Linux Loons Break Into Congressman's Office and trash PC's By Installing Linux on them. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/26/vandals_install_linux_on_congressman_office_computers/ "According to a statement by the Grimm campaign, large stones and concrete were thrown through the campaign office windows during or around the same time miscreants "corrupted and erased the hard-drive of the campaign computer server, which contains confidential campaign files and polling data", by installing Linux*." These criminals should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. There is nothing worse than installing Linux on a PC. It renders the PC 100 percent useless to the average office worker. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!! Typical Linux loving liberal democrats at work. Foster wrote: > Linux Loons Break Into Congressman's Office and trash PC's By > Installing Linux on them. > > http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/09/26/vandals_install_linux_on_congressman_office_computers/ > > "According to a statement by the Grimm campaign, large stones and > concrete were thrown through the campaign office windows during or > around the same time miscreants "corrupted and erased the hard-drive > of the campaign computer server, which contains confidential > campaign files and polling data", by installing Linux*." > > These criminals should be prosecuted to the fullest...

I have 6 PC's with Linux installed and Cable modem with LAN connection, How can I hookup all these PC's to Internet??
I have 6 PC's with various Linux flavors and Cable modem connection from Comcast (LAN connection provided on Cable Modem), also 8-port Linksys switch, How can I hook all these PC's to Network, I have half dozen extra NIC cards. If I install one extra NIC card in one of the Linux PC (two NIC cards in one PC) and connect one NIC card to cable modem and other NIC card to 8-port switch will it work (do I have to do any configuration)?. Or if I connect cable modem directly to one port on the switch and other 6 PC's to switch on other 6 slots, will that work?. Thanks. GS wrote: > I have 6 PC's with various Linux flavors and Cable modem connection > from Comcast (LAN connection provided on Cable Modem), also 8-port > Linksys switch, How can I hook all these PC's to Network, I have half > dozen extra NIC cards. If I install one extra NIC card in one of the > Linux PC (two NIC cards in one PC) and connect one NIC card to cable > modem and other NIC card to 8-port switch will it work (do I have to do > any configuration)?. Or if I connect cable modem directly to one port > on the switch and other 6 PC's to switch on other 6 slots, will that > work?. Thanks. You can use one of the computers as a firewall, that included address translation. Place it between the cable modem and the switch. If I install extra NIC card and enable firewall from services (service iptables start) then PC acts as a firewall inbetween my cable modem and s...

After linux's network works, win XP's network cannot work ?
I installed Redhat linux 9.0 in one of my disk partition . at first, linux cannot recognize broadcom 440x's ethernet card. Then I download driver through broadcom.com and successfully installed the ethernet driver. Now I can surf the net in linux. But when I return to win XP , it displays "a network cable is unplugged", but the device is working properly. (the cable is indeed plugged) So I failed to link to Internet in XP,but can go online in linux. Any great man know how this happened? How to solve this problem? Thanks! winwish@gmail.com wrote: > I installed Redhat linux 9.0 in one of my disk partition . > at first, linux cannot recognize broadcom 440x's ethernet card. > Then I download driver through broadcom.com and successfully installed > the ethernet driver. > Now I can surf the net in linux. > But when I return to win XP , it displays "a network cable is > unplugged", but the device is working properly. (the cable is indeed > plugged) > So I failed to link to Internet in XP,but can go online in linux. > > Any great man know how this happened? Ask Bill G, he may be able to help... > How to solve this problem? Problem? What problem? Linux is working fine ;-) Have you tried a new cable? On Wed, 22 Mar 2006 23:34:03 -0800, winwish wrote: > > I installed Redhat linux 9.0 in one of my disk partition . at first, linux > cannot recognize broadcom 440x's ethernet card. Then I download driv...

The Linux Community Doesn't Lie about Linux
In spite of claims made by Sophos, and one of their shills in a YouTube video, which was linked to here by the trolls as "proof" that the Linux community lies to promote Linux, the Linux Community is honest and open about viruses and malware on Linux. Here's what the Linux Community really has to say on the subject: ------ http://www.linux.org/threads/malware-and-antivirus-systems-for-linux.4455/ "All computer systems can suffer from malware and viruses, including Linux. Thankfully, very few viruses exist for Linux, so users typically do not install antiv...

Web resources about - Can Linux Survive the Beating it's Getting? The 2.6 Linux kernel doesn't even work!!! - comp.os.linux.advocacy

Resources last updated: 3/29/2016 4:06:53 PM