| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 22.10.99 05:11l 214 Lines 6940 Bytes #-9710 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_265B
Read: DL6KCF GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/265B
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<OE5XBL<OE3XSR<OE3XBS<S50BOX<9A0BBS<9A0YDA<HA1KZH<
HA5OB<HA3PG<SV1AAW<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 991021/2327Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:9555 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_265
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA21781 ; Thu, 21 Oct 99 23:08:56 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016514 ; Thu, 21 Oct 99 18:19:41 MET
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 99 18:16:47 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_265B>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/265B
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
> somehow fucked up, or simply because you want to move the server to
> another domain (you cannot do that without re-installation, boooo).
> Now try to do that without touching the D: partitions. It won't let you.
> So your only option is to restore D: from a backup after installation is
> completed. This adds extra risk and lots of time.
>
> Under Linux you always get the opportunity to look at the exact partition
> table entries, and select the partition and location YOU want. And it
> won't touch partitions that are not involved, but later you can still add
> them to the filesystem (e.g. mounting a Windows partition).
>
> Of course, there is always a class of users (you are in it) who do not
> understand enough of basic disk partitioning and filesystem layouts to
> perform these tasks. For those, Linux distributions also include "wizard"
> like partitioners, that cope with standard situations like "use entire disk
> for Linux" or "shrink Windows partition to make room for Linux".
>
I'm not going to get into a "he said -- he said" in the wrong news group. I
bult my first
micro in 1978 and grew up on UNIX and MS systems. You apparently have some
sort
of 'know it all complex' to attach anything that you difdn't dream up. I
currently, successfully,
run a number of computer networks and know what happens to Linux and MS based
machines
running on them. I think you need to get out into the real worl more often.
Nuff Said --
Tony -- KF3BX
> Rob
> --
> +----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
> | Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org | WWWhome: http://www.pe1chl.demon.nl/ |
> | AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
> +----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1999 06:16:14 GMT
From: Hamish Moffatt <hamish@rising.com.au>
Subject: Linux crashes Windows - was Re: The BBS network and tcp/ip
The Owner <agiroux@cvn.net> wrote:
> Of course it is -- your statements below show it. WIndows cannot learn new
> configurations
> to the hardware without Plug & Play or through the WIndows interfaces.
Re-partitioning your hard drive is not a change to your hardware
configuration.
Hamish
>.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1999 16:27:41 +0100
From: mnskue@gmx.de
Subject: meine neue homepage 2653
http://www.kaiser-net-shop.de
dhccinytpydcjxuoqtjyinunemvemhqhtwvewhmrfzoydhplyxnluewmuycgvlfndlvtgtemnbicklh
chhjhqys
>.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1999 06:14:14 GMT
From: Hamish Moffatt <hamish@rising.com.au>
Subject: PACTOR or AMTOR
Bob Lewis <aa4pb@erols.com> wrote:
> developed. I too would personally rather see an open standard. It
> would be nice if *all* software used in amateur radio were supplied
> with source code so it could be modified and expanded upon rather
> than re-inventing the wheel every time. It's probably not going to
> happen though.
No, not all software.. but enough to give us a reasonable toolbox
I think. Already there is a lot of packet/network support. There's some
digital mode stuff too, like QSSTV for slow-scan and PSK31LX for PSK31.
There's some rig control stuff for Kenwood and ICOM at least.
http://radio.linux.org.au has a nice database.
Hamish
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 00:15:18 GMT
From: "John Roberts" <johnr@ece.jhu.edu>
Subject: Swiss-PTC and SCS PTC-II -- What's the difference?
Hi,
I have a couple of questions. I would *really* appreciate it if you could
help me find the answers. If there is a web site or other resouce that I
should consult for this information, please let me know.
What is the difference between the SCS PTC-II and the Swiss-PTC? I see lots
of ham radio operators talking about the SCS PTC-II and I see a lot of Red
Cross people talking about the Swiss-PTC. Is there a difference? Does
SCS-PTC make the Swiss-PTC?
I get the impression that they are both Pactor/Pactor II modems, but I'm not
sure if they are interoperable?
Thank you very much for your help!
John Roberts
>.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 15:33:52 -0400
From: pdickson@us.oracle.com (Paul Dickson)
Subject: TCP/IP and the macOS
Has anybody written an AX.25 driver for the Apple OpenTransport
environment, so I can just plug it in and use all my standard TCP/IP apps?
The only Macintosh
packet TCP/IP software I have found is a very ancient thing written in the
Netherlands that was stand-alone.
--
Paul Dickson
Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of Oracle Corporation.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 18 Oct 1999 07:27:37 -0500
From: "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net>
Subject: The BBS network and tcp/ip.
Hank Oredson wrote
>Yes, I looked at all the web sites, RPMs, and other references
>provided by the Linux Bigots (and those provided by everyone else
>as well). Not much there. Nothing there that will do what I am already
>doing, much less what I actually want to do.
Use UUCP, it's built-in. Transfers news and email just fine, although
dated. Use JNOS. If it really offends you, call it SNOS and say you
designed it (no source code though). You can probably run it on
Clover.
>But the original issues remain, and have not been addressed by any
>but two posters to this thread. Pretty useless newsgroup. Plenty
>of babblers, very few doers. Got some radios to install and antennas
>to put up, and a bit of new software capability to try out. Anyone
>interested in actually DOING something? Give it a try.
Pot calling the kettle black.
The bottom line, is we (Hams) do not need monolith programs anymore.
Programs that duplicate the stuff built-in to the OS used. Since Unix was
designed, the object has been to build function in modules. Modules that
interact and communicate using pipes, sockets, or even files. Microsoft
even uses this model in their office suite. Office is not a monolith, it
uses
process communication between modules.
JNOS, SNOS, PKNOS, JIMMY-NOS, NOSNOS, they're all monoliths.
They will all do something, and perform work, but who really cares about
an addition to the monolith.
Break the program down, and use the fork/exec, and some inter-process
communication. Don't keep copying/modifying JNOS.
Steve
>.
------------------------------
Date: 18 Oct 1999 13:45:08 GMT
From: Hamish Moffatt <hamish@rising.com.au>
Subject: The BBS network and tcp/ip.
Charles Brabham <n5pvl@texoma.net> wrote:
To be continued in digest: hd_99_265C
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
