- WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] lilo

by doug waud

Hi > I was wondering if anyone can help me with lilo. When > I boot my machine it only displays LI. I seem to > remember this having to do something with the drive > geometry. Any Ideas? I also installed grub which > when I boot just displays GRUB. What could be wrong? Start with the Lilo User's guide, troubleshooting, Boot loader messages http://www.yggdrasil.com/bible/lilo/user/node68.html#SECTION006200000000000… (the main page is http://www.yggdrasil.com/bible/lilo/user/user.html in case I screwed up that more specific pointer) :-) I find this whole document is the "bible" for lilo. doug -- Douglas R Waud 17 Lantern Lane, Shrewsbury, MA, 01545-2006 http://www.ummed.edu/pub/d/drw/

April 19, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Marc Hughes

On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Doug Chamberlin wrote: > > Third, there are hundreds of thousands of developers using Delphi who now > can use their familiar development environment to do Linux applications. I > believe this will have a major impact on the Linux world and give C a run > for its money. Will it supplant C? Of course not! Will it provide a > credible alternative? You bet! Like Me! I've been doing Delphi for the past 4 years at my job. Up until now, it's been Delphi at work, PERL/C/PHP/etc. at home. This Monday I'm starting a Linux job... you better believe that I'm going to push to get a copy of Kylix there! I more relate Delphi (and hence Kylix) with Java in programming style. It just "feels" more like Java, just about everything passed by reference, meager garbage collection, and kick ass utility classes. But the real power is in the development environment, not the language. I can slap together a nice looking application that does something usefull in half a day. Using GTK or QT it takes me that long just to get the GUI right. Expect to see a lot more graphical applications (even tho most will be crap) as soon as the Free version is released. -Marc

April 19, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Doug Chamberlin

At 4/16/2001 11:50 PM (Monday), Tom Guilderson wrote: >I won't proceed to thrash pascal since I have never really done any >development in pascal, but the linux/unix development world is dominated >by C. [more snipped] If you are going to do any >serious development in a Unix environment, you will need to know C. This has certainly been true for a long time. However, Kylix is a significant departure from that history and a significant event worth noting. Why? First, the version of Pascal that Borland has evolved is "not your father's Pascal". In it's Delphi form it is fully equivalent to C++ in power and efficiency. Second, Delphi (and it's Turbo Pascal ancestor) have never been ported from the DOS/Windows environment before (except for a brief aborted visit to the Mac OS). Therefore, no one using the Unix platforms has been able to evaluate it properly. With Kylix this will be possible. Third, there are hundreds of thousands of developers using Delphi who now can use their familiar development environment to do Linux applications. I believe this will have a major impact on the Linux world and give C a run for its money. Will it supplant C? Of course not! Will it provide a credible alternative? You bet! Interesting times, indeed!

April 19, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Dennis Payne

> I won't proceed to thrash pascal since I have never really done any > development in pascal, but the linux/unix development world is dominated > by C. If it is not written in C, then the interpreter, byte code > interpreter/virtaul machine for the language was likely written in C > (perl, tcl/tk, python, java etc etc). C is also the language that gives > you the best interfaces for system calls into the low level aspects of > unix such as the file systems, I/O etc. If you are going to do any > serious development in a Unix environment, you will need to know C. Pascal and C are so similar in capabilities, the argument presented here is confusing. Except for strings there is no reason, Pascal couldn't directly interface the system calls as C. The free pascal compiler has a C string type and can do just what I suggested (or at least that is what the documentation suggests). The language that the interpreter, compiler or whatever is written in doesn't disprove the viability of languages only proves the flexibility of C. Assuming that's true, free pascal is written in pascal. (Perhaps instead of BSD/Linux where the GNU tools are replaced with BSD tools someone could make a distribution using only Pascal, ADA, etc.) (I don't mean to start a holy war. Considering the author suggested python, tcl/tk, etc. as tools, he obviously doesn't believe C is the best tool for every job. These statements just bothered me.) Dennis Payne dulsi(a)identicalsoftware.com

April 19, 2001

Cable modem/lilo

by William Hine

The version of SUSE linux I was running seemed to give me a problem with DHCP. Ive yet to figure out what it is, and cable modems should be simple to setup. Anyways I installed mandrake 8.0 beta 3. The installation utility is great. I booted in the system for the first time and was able to use my modem. Thanx for the reccomendation. I was wondering if anyone can help me with lilo. When I boot my machine it only displays LI. I seem to remember this having to do something with the drive geometry. Any Ideas? I also installed grub which when I boot just displays GRUB. What could be wrong? TIA Bill __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/

April 19, 2001

[Fwd: Your 4/19 LUG meeting]

by Andy Stewart

HI gang, Would somebody who attends the WLUG meeting on Thursday be willing to write up something which can be posted on LWN, LinuxToday, and LinuxUsersGroups.org? Kara has asked, and I told her that we'd come up with something. Thanks in advance, Andy -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Your 4/19 LUG meeting Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2001 11:24:22 -0500 (CDT) From: Kara Pritchard <kara(a)luci.org> To: <andystewart(a)mediaone.net> Hi Andy, Looks like you have a fun evening planned for your next LUG meeting. I'd be interested if you (or someone in your group) would do a write-up about the special meeting, or perhaps an interview. I'll host it at LinuxUsersGroups.org and have it posted to LWN and LinuxToday. It'll be a good opportunity both for your group and for Ziegler's book. -- Kara Pritchard Phone: 618-398-7360 Author, RHCE Exam Cram Director of Exam Development http://www.lpi.org/ Site Manager http://www.LinuxUsersGroups.org/ --

April 19, 2001

Re: [Wlug] max memory?

by ccb＠acm.org

> > Is linux limited to 4GB memory? > > Nope, not 2.4 anyways. I don't remember the limit, but it's a big > number. ;-) > > > I have inherited some boxes with 5GB each and I'm planning on loading linux. Some things to remember - if these are x86 architecture boxes, you still have a 3GB per process user space limit. Even with 64GB of RAM, no single process can see more than 4GB and the top 1GB of that is mapped as kernel space. Big memory means that you get to have lots of large virtual address spaces that can remain mapped in physical RAM. For virtual address spaces with wider than 32-bit addresses, you need 64-bit processors. ccb -- Charles C. Bennett, Jr. VA LiNUX Systems Systems Engineer, Northeast US 25 Burlington Mall Rd., Suite 300 +1 617 543-6513 Burlington, MA 01803-4145 ccb(a)valinux.com www.valinux.com

April 18, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Stephen C. Daukas

At 11:50 PM 4/16/2001 -0400, Tom Guilderson wrote: [... lots of good stuff ...] > > Also, are there any tools or compilers for Pascal? Remember, the > Delphi folks > > understand Pascal, and I'm sure they will ask this question. (It has > been 20 > > years since I programmed anything in Pascal...). I'll admit that this isn't much of a sample, but the three folks I know that actually use the product are proficient in C/C++ as well as Pascal, so you may not have much of an issue. >I won't proceed to thrash pascal since I have never really done any >development in pascal, but the linux/unix development world is dominated >by C. If it is not written in C, then the interpreter, byte code >interpreter/virtaul machine for the language was likely written in C >(perl, tcl/tk, python, java etc etc). C is also the language that gives >you the best interfaces for system calls into the low level aspects of >unix such as the file systems, I/O etc. If you are going to do any >serious development in a Unix environment, you will need to know C. Kylix is both Pascal and C++. Pascal is being released first, with C++ not far behind. Kylix will also allow you to move your stuff from Windoze to Linux with apparent ease. For more reading, here is an interesting article I found in my archives. I'll try to find a more recent reference... http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-01-31-001-27-OP-CY-SW

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Tom Guilderson

Andy Stewart wrote: > > HI gang, > > I am starting to write up the last 1/3 of my presentation to the Delphi > Developers group, and its the section on developer tools and utilities. I'd > like some input from you folks as to what I should include in this section. > > Emacs - the original "IDE" (???) > gdb for debugging (nicer with DDD front end, IMHO) > make and Makefiles > gcc Emacs - yes - is there any other editor? Hey it even runs on VOS! I don'tneed no stinking fully blown ide visual xyz gcc, g++ - yes make - yes (for smaler projects) gdb - absolutely (you need a debugger!) haven't used ddd since i usually invoke gdb from the command line. sometimes (gdb) attach pid - to debug a running daemon process. > What else do "real" Linux developers use? Maybe I'm suffering a brain cramp > this evening, but your input will help. cvs (or maybe rcs) for source code version control autoconf, automake, and libtool for larger projects when make alone becomes too cumbersome (more than 9 or 10 files or multiple target systems) bison and flex (yacc and lex in the commercial SysV world) POSIX pthread library for multithreading (portable accross SysV, BSD, Linux, and if done carefully NT since it is posix compliant when the posix subsystem is enabled) also because the real world is asynchronous. m4 for macro processing strace on linux, truss (prefer over strace) on SysV and BSD (heard that a port for linux is being planned) patch and diff sed, awk, grep and all the other shell scripting tools perl - something will need it eventually (Not my favorite, but very powerful. Also not all perl programs need be impossible to figure out with purposefuuly ugly syntax and formatting) tcl/tk (not as much now that I am learning to use python for those quick and dirty gui tools) python 2.0 For java switch back and forth between IBM and Sun JDK - lean more to IBM. for HTML editing switch around between emacs, amaya (W3C), and bluefish depending on mood For dynamic web pages PHP (we have a tomcat, apache JSP), server we are playing with at work) also there are so many useful things already done in perl, you can just use with almost no effort. Don't forget about libraries available for doing many common tasks such as GTK and Qt for creating GUI interfaces (if you have used Xlib primitives you quickly appreciate libraries like GTK which save time) libz for compressing and uncompressing image and mime handling libraries etc. libwww from W3C for client side http stuff (good for crawlers) There have got to be lots of other development related tools like code warrior, kdevelop (i actually like the kwrite editor that comes with KDE), > Also, are there any tools or compilers for Pascal? Remember, the Delphi folks > understand Pascal, and I'm sure they will ask this question. (It has been 20 > years since I programmed anything in Pascal...). I won't proceed to thrash pascal since I have never really done any development in pascal, but the linux/unix development world is dominated by C. If it is not written in C, then the interpreter, byte code interpreter/virtaul machine for the language was likely written in C (perl, tcl/tk, python, java etc etc). C is also the language that gives you the best interfaces for system calls into the low level aspects of unix such as the file systems, I/O etc. If you are going to do any serious development in a Unix environment, you will need to know C.

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Red Hat Linux 7.1

by Brian J. Conway

My earlier statement was merely a point on RedHat's previous _shaky_ release. I've been using Mandrake's gcc-2.96 recompiled on 7.2 out of Cooker for months and it's an excellent compiler (hell, Cooker's been compiled by it for 4 months now), and I would recommend it to anyone. > Read slashdot for rebuttal. I read Slashdot for my daily dose of trolls and goatsex links, but WLUG is not the place to comment on that one. -b

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Dennis Payne

> What else do "real" Linux developers use? strace grep ldd nm I don't think they would be useful and helpful to demonstrate. Frankly the best tool is bash. The automation of all the stupid little things you need to prep data or whatever is incredibly useful. (It is why the GNU tools are requirement to make NT useful IMHO.) > Also, are there any tools or compilers for Pascal? www.freepascal.org They have been building a Turbo Pascal/Delphi compiler for Linux, Dos, etc. (Used it once to build an old Turbo Pascal program.) Dennis Payne dulsi(a)identicalsoftware.com

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Red Hat Linux 7.1

by Dennis Payne

> And the cool thing is, it doesn't matter that they shipped an > incompatible, broken compiler Read slashdot for rebuttal. > since /usr/include/asm and /linux > are includes for the kernel that glibc is built against and not the > current kernel, you can't compile modules that are compatible with your > current kernel anyways! Actually from the slashdot article it sounds like they are using linux 2.4 so the includes are correct. Dennis Payne dulsi(a)identicalsoftware.com

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Doug Chamberlin

At 4/16/2001 11:50 AM (Monday), Scott Venier wrote: >You might also want to mention codewarrior. http://www.metrowerks.com >Nice and pretty for those folks who grew up developing on macos or >windows. You might keep in mind that the Delphi Developers Group is made up of developers who are 99% likely to use Kylix for development. Therefore, they won't be much interested in alternative development environments. However, they WILL be interested in auxiliary tools which are considered essential to managing applications on Linux not matter what the original language the app is written in. I would put the rpm and other packaging/installing tools in this category. P.S. I think Kylix includes a debugger. If it is as good as the one Borland has for the Win32 platform then it is all these developers will be using.

April 17, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Red Hat Linux 7.1

by Frank Sweetser

On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 06:57:49PM -0400, Brian J. Conway wrote: > > Red Hat 7.1, based on the Linux 2.4 kernel, is out as of 10:00am this > > morning. I have a mirror of i386 disc1 and disc2 ISO's and the full FTP > > install tree if anyone wants it. > > And the cool thing is, it doesn't matter that they shipped an > incompatible, broken compiler, because since /usr/include/asm and /linux > are includes for the kernel that glibc is built against and not the > current kernel, you can't compile modules that are compatible with your > current kernel anyways! On a serious note, I don't suppose anyone knows Actually, the kernel team (linus in particular) has been screaming bloody murder that the distro's do this for at least two years now. If you're compiling user space, you're running against user space (glibc) so that's what you care about being compatible with, not the kernel. If you're compiling kernel mods, you should be compiling with -I/usr/src/linux-2.4/ (or wherever you keep your kernel source). -- Frank Sweetser rasmusin at wpi.edu, fs at suave.net | $ x 15 Full-time WPI Network Tech, Part time Linux/Perl guy | There are still some other things to do, so don't think if I didn't fix your favorite bug that your bug report is in the bit bucket. (It may be, but don't think it. :-) Larry Wall in <7238(a)jpl-devvax.JPL.NASA.GOV>

April 16, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Red Hat Linux 7.1

by Brian J. Conway

> Red Hat 7.1, based on the Linux 2.4 kernel, is out as of 10:00am this > morning. I have a mirror of i386 disc1 and disc2 ISO's and the full FTP > install tree if anyone wants it. And the cool thing is, it doesn't matter that they shipped an incompatible, broken compiler, because since /usr/include/asm and /linux are includes for the kernel that glibc is built against and not the current kernel, you can't compile modules that are compatible with your current kernel anyways! On a serious note, I don't suppose anyone knows when we can expect to see 7.1 for Alpha out? Sadly, it's still the best bet of the distros out there for running on a Multia. Brian J. Conway dogbert(a)clue4all.net Geek for hire: http://clue4all.net/resume Men may control the free world, but women control the boobs. (http://www.pvponline.com/archive.php3?archive=20001024)

April 16, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Andy Stewart

>Keith Wright wrote: > > > From: Andy Stewart <andystewart(a)mediaone.net> > > > > I am starting to write up the last 1/3 of my presentation to the Delphi > > Developers group, and its the section on developer tools and utilities. I'd > > like some input from you folks as to what I should include in this section. > > > > Emacs - the original "IDE" (???) > > What are those questions marks for? Of course Emacs. I definitely want to include Emacs. My question marks were for the comment about whether or not emacs could be considereed the original "IDE". No big deal...it was an editorial comment, anyway. Later, Andy -- Andy Stewart, Founder -o) | The sooner you make your first 5000 Worcester Linux Users' Group /\ | mistakes, the sooner you will be able to Worcester, MA, USA _\_v | correct them. -- Nicolaides http://www.wlug.org |

April 16, 2001

Red Hat Linux 7.1

by Charles R. Anderson

Red Hat 7.1, based on the Linux 2.4 kernel, is out as of 10:00am this morning. I have a mirror of i386 disc1 and disc2 ISO's and the full FTP install tree if anyone wants it. FTP install/upgrade boot image: ftp://angus.ind.wpi.edu/pub/mirrors/redhat/linux/7.1/en/os/i386/images/boot… Server: angus.ind.wpi.edu Directory: /pub/mirrors/redhat/linux/7.1/en/os/i386 ISO download: ftp://angus.ind.wpi.edu/pub/mirrors/redhat/linux/7.1/en/iso/i386 Have fun! Charles R. Anderson cra(a)wpi.edu Network Engineer (508) 831-6110 Computing and Communications Center (508) 831-5115 Worcester Polytechnic Institute Fax (508) 831-5483

April 16, 2001

Re: [Wlug] max memory?

by Brian J. Conway

> Is linux limited to 4GB memory? Nope, not 2.4 anyways. I don't remember the limit, but it's a big number. ;-) > I have inherited some boxes with 5GB each and I'm planning on loading linux. I wish I could inherit some boxes like that. Brian J. Conway dogbert(a)clue4all.net Geek for hire: http://clue4all.net/resume

April 16, 2001

RE: [Wlug] max memory?

by Keller, Tim

Nope, the new kernel will work with 64gb, you just have to go under "Processor type and features" and change the settings for High Memory Support. Tim. -----Original Message----- From: Bill Mills-Curran [mailto:bcurran@clariion.com] Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 11:54 AM To: Worcester Linux Users Group Subject: [Wlug] max memory? Is linux limited to 4GB memory? I have inherited some boxes with 5GB each and I'm planning on loading linux. Thanks, Bill _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

April 16, 2001

max memory?

by Bill Mills-Curran

Is linux limited to 4GB memory? I have inherited some boxes with 5GB each and I'm planning on loading linux. Thanks, Bill

April 16, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Scott Venier

You might also want to mention codewarrior. http://www.metrowerks.com Nice and pretty for those folks who grew up developing on macos or windows. Scott

April 16, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Aaron Haviland

Bob Brown said: > How about rcs and rpm? rpm? you wanna start a distro war, doncha :P deb all the way, buddy! ... (btw, anyone know of a place that might be hiring someone who likes to make .debs?) -- Orion orion [at] tribble [dot] dyndns [dot] org This IS a sig.

April 16, 2001

RE: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Bob Brown

How about rcs and rpm? Regards, Bob

April 16, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Keith Wright

> From: Viper <viper(a)2ghz.net> > > As far as I knew real programmers do use debuggers unless we all have > become perfect coders for some crazy reason now. I thought about trying one a few times in the past twenty years, but it was always more trouble to install the debugger and figure out how it works than to just "fix the damn thing". Mostly I just use printf, writeln, jsr outstr, or whatever it's called, and think really hard. But then, I learned to program when it was done by turning in the card deck in the morning and then coming back just before midnight to see what it did. You learn to be careful that way, but I don't really recommend it. -- -- Keith Wright <kwright(a)free-comp-shop.com> Programmer in Chief, Free Computer Shop <http://www.free-comp-shop.com> --- Food, Shelter, Source code. ---

April 16, 2001

Re: [Wlug] Need input re: developers tools

by Orion

Keith Wright said: > > From: Andy Stewart <andystewart(a)mediaone.net> > > > > I am starting to write up the last 1/3 of my presentation to the Delphi > > Developers group, and its the section on developer tools and utilities. I'd > > like some input from you folks as to what I should include in this section. > > > > Emacs - the original "IDE" (???) > > What are those questions marks for? Of course Emacs. > > > gdb for debugging (nicer with DDD front end, IMHO) > > make and Makefiles > > gcc > > > > What else do "real" Linux developers use? Maybe I'm suffering a brain cramp > > this evening, but your input will help. what about libtool and autoconf (and family) ? > Real Programmers don't use a debugger, but you can talk about it if you > have time. I've never used Perl (except by accident) but there are those > who find it useful. (Those who find it beautiful are perverts, don't talk to them.) > > > Also, are there any tools or compilers for Pascal? Remember, the Delphi folks > > understand Pascal, and I'm sure they will ask this question. (It has been 20 > > years since I programmed anything in Pascal...). > > There is a Pascal to C translator laying about. I tried to use it once, > but the Pascal program I had was not in any of the four or five dialects > of Pascal that it knew, so it didn't work very well. If you were writting > the program yourself and could avoid extentions of dubious parentage, > it might work better. Unfortunately, anybody who is using Pascal for > anything other than teaching CS101, as intended, has probably locked themselves > into some bastard proprietary version that will never run anywhere unless > the company that owns it decides it should. The original implementation > of Pascal by Wirth was quite portable, I ported it myself once so I know. > Somebody must have put it on Linux by now, but I don't know any details. [orion@rex(~)] apt-cache search pascal fp-compiler - Free Pascal Compiler fp-docs - Free Pascal Documentation fp-units-api - Free Pascal API units fp-units-base - Free Pascal base units ... fp-units-db - Free Pascal units for some database libraries fp-utils - Free Pascal Utils gpc - The GNU Pascal compiler. gpc-2.95 - The GNU Pascal compiler. gpc-2.95-doc - Documentation for the GNU Pascal compiler (gpc). gpc-doc - Documentation for the GNU Pascal compiler (gpc). p2c - Pascal to C translator pas2html - Highlight Pascal and Modula-2 sources for WWW presentation [orion@rex(~)] -- Orion orion [at] tribble [dot] dyndns [dot] org [{(SPLAT!!!)}] oops.

April 16, 2001