Linuxers July 2001

linuxers@mm.ilug-bom.org.in

117 participants
352 discussions

Slackware
by Philip S Tellis 01 Jul '01

01 Jul '01

Slackware 8.0 is out. Has anyone written it to CD yet? Philip -- As Will Rogers would have said, "There is no such things as a free variable." Visit my webpage at http://www.ncst.ernet.in/~philip/ Read my writings at http://www.ncst.ernet.in/~philip/writings/ MSN philiptellis Yahoo! philiptellis

1 0

Re-building the kernel
by Kunal Jhunjhunwala 01 Jul '01

01 Jul '01

Hi, I couldnt find anything on the ILUG site, on how to re-build the kernel of a remote server... Could some one direct me to the right page? Thanx, Kunal

2 1

Re: [ILUG-BOM] Simputer
by Mayuresh A Kathe 01 Jul '01

01 Jul '01

> It would help if you could explain what you found lacking in their > X-implementation. And I don't understand what you mean by scalability in > the context of a Simputer. One of the biggest problems with the Simputer is it uses X. > | If you have to make > |a group of simputers work to help people you will have to rewrite hazzar stuff > Group of simputers working together to do what? I hope you understand that > Simputer is not for highend distributed computing. Just the fact that they are using X makes it straight away lean towards distributed computing. Do you know the power a StrongARM@206Mhz offers (remember its a RISC machine)? Its tremendous, putting it in a sickly handheld capable of doing the current things is like recruiting Arnold Schwarzenegger to pour you a glass of milk everyday. What Somesh probably meant by working together is networking... Devices so small should be able to network effortlessly with not just with their own kind, but also with desktop machines. > | I agree with mayuresh that > |a group of engineers can't make something worth the hype of simputer . > |In its present design simputer is useless piece of silicon. > > May be it is. May be it is not. But we should reason why it is or why it > is not. The reasoning will continue... ~Mayuresh

1 0

Re: [ILUG-BOM] Simputer
by Mayuresh A Kathe 01 Jul '01

01 Jul '01

>> Encore developed the hardware and the IISc guys developed or rather >> put together the software, there are just a few instances where the >> IISc guys have litterally written the device drivers (I had > > IISc developed IML, the IML browser, text to speech converter for hindi > and kannada, integration of tts into IMLI, tapatap and some other user > space stuff. All system level stuff was taken from linux development > with minor changes. The IML browser (Imli) is actually "Chimera"... Actually I don't think they "developed" tapatap, but rather implemented one of the free handwritting recognition algorithms. I think most of the System level stuff (including the kernel) were taken from the StrongARM Linux port (I think that was the LART project) But they sure did a great job of implementing those technologies, better than re-inventing the wheel :-) ~Mayuresh

3 2

NIC drops output
by Satish Dasi 01 Jul '01

01 Jul '01

Hi this is a newbie here I have 2 NICs both recognized by kudzu as RTL 8139 and RTLtoo. However after i changed the ip address on eth0 it started to behave strangely. Both the cards didnt ping their own ips neither the ips of the network machines to which they were connected. Is there a prob with the cards or with Linux generic divers????? Pls help me out in this Thanx in advance Satish

2 1

Re: [ILUG-BOM] The Simputer
by Mayuresh A Kathe 01 Jul '01

01 Jul '01

> The main thing is that IISc will not be building the simputer. Only its > specification. The specification is released openly under the SGPL, and > anyone can build an implementation. The software is downloadable under > the GPL. Got that... But, what I am trying to point out (unsuccessfully) is that, I admire the things done at IISc (had interacted with one of the guys) but based on the things done at IISc (including the true goal of reaching the masses) companies like Encore are taking a free ride on getting the government to subsidize certain operations of theirs, that is really sick, beacuse for them its primarily business. Any ways, just for a bit of info about Encore, they have a whole lot of old 486 laptops lying with them which they are ready to sell off at dirt cheap rates (remember my earlier post regarding the same?), that just goes to prove the condition of the company... Well, its their job, let them do it as per what they think is right. > Anyway, I thought the project was good, and you didn't. Lets leave it > at that. Yup, sorry if I gave an impression that I want to prove you wrong or that I am right, just that I am really feeling sick about the whole issue of Simputer. Warm Regards, ~Mayuresh

5 4

Remote Installation
by Kompalli SuryaPrakash 01 Jul '01

01 Jul '01

> Hi Linux Champs, > Is there any [simply ANY] way to install Linux REMOTELY. > I know this question is stupid, but any REMOTE possibilities, > ideas, thaughts, etc are really appreciated. U mean?? Like one doesnt have direct access to the keyboard / mouse of the machine on which u are going to install Linux? I dont remember any distro which can do that right now, But If u mean accessing the media containing the installation files remotely, with u sitting in front of the machine u want to install linux on, then this can be done using NFS,ftp or HTTP install.... u need to use the bootnet.img available on any any installation disk and boot off a floppy. Then follow instructions... Bye, SP -- _ _ |/ |_ |_| |\ompalli _|urya| rakash MSN : - ksuryap(a)hotmail.com Email: - ksuryap1(a)yahoo.com Phone: - 022-5506101 _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com

2 1

simputer
by Philip S Tellis 01 Jul '01

01 Jul '01

Ok, I think before anyone posts anything more about the simputer, you should first read *everything* on their website. There's no point arguing here about stuff that's already in the faq. Like I say always, read the docs, and don't ask questions that are already answered there. That's what the docs are meant for. Philip -- Make the coupling between modules visible. - The Elements of Programming Style (Kernighan & Plaugher) Visit my webpage at http://www.ncst.ernet.in/~philip/ Read my writings at http://www.ncst.ernet.in/~philip/writings/ MSN philiptellis Yahoo! philiptellis

1 0

Re: [ILUG-BOM] Simputer
by Mayuresh A Kathe 01 Jul '01

01 Jul '01

> The product is an Open Source hardware project, which has naturally used the > Open Source approach to its software development as well. The IISc has > undertaken the devlopment, with the active cooperation of many others. Now > that it has reached the kickoff stage, it is possible to reach out and > commercialise the production. So Encore (as I understand from the mails, I > do not recall seeing any announcment to that effect, but then I haven't > surfed thru the site either for a couple of fortnights) is one of the > companies that has decided to do this. Encore has not one of the companies that has decided to do this after the project is over, rather Encore has had vested interests since begining and has been investing on the hardware heavily. So simply put, the situation is like: Encore developed the hardware and the IISc guys developed or rather put together the software, there are just a few instances where the IISc guys have litterally written the device drivers (I had interacted with one of them, a guy called Pai, don't remember is first name though) > If the ex-factory cost is 3k and the retail price is 6k, does anyone think > this is wrong? Vickram, the ex-factory costs can't be 3K, just the base component costs are 3K. As in my earlier mail, add the rest of the stuff and voila, you have a "White Elephant". ~Mayuresh

2 1

Simputer
by Vickram Crishna 01 Jul '01

01 Jul '01

I have been browsing thru the debate on Simputer, and am curious about some of the directions this has taken. The product is an Open Source hardware project, which has naturally used the Open Source approach to its software development as well. The IISc has undertaken the devlopment, with the active cooperation of many others. Now that it has reached the kickoff stage, it is possible to reach out and commercialise the production. So Encore (as I understand from the mails, I do not recall seeing any announcment to that effect, but then I haven't surfed thru the site either for a couple of fortnights) is one of the companies that has decided to do this. If the ex-factory cost is 3k and the retail price is 6k, does anyone think this is wrong? I very much doubt that the company will make any money at all on this for many years to come. Unless of course, it takes off like a rocket (a la i-mode in Japan) in which case I am sure that others will jump on the bandwagon and the price will fall. Till then the 3k gross margin per piece will flow out like water, absorbed by thirsty distribution, marketing and overhead costs. Why am I so interested? As some of you will know from my earlier mail, I have initiated the Hawking Communicator project in Open Source (www.radiophony.com/hawking.html) and at some point this project too will move towards commercialisation. I am keen to discuss all aspects of this with as many groups of people as possible, so that we as developers are properly prepared to do whatever it takes to get the software used. This is not the forum for such a discussion, so please do join in the development discussion at Yahoo!groups (/radiophony) or mail me directly. Vickram Crishna

2 1

Jump to page:

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Linuxers July 2001