misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

Post by Kolja Kaehl » Sat, 23 May 1992 02:35:25



Some things I'm curious about:

        - what do I need to upgrade from gcc2.1 to the latest release(2.11c?) ?
          Do I really have to rebuild all my binaries  ?

        - what about that 14-char-filenames-thing ? I looked into
          /usr/src/linux/include/limits.h and found NAME_MAX 255 and
          _POSIX_NAME_MAX 14. My system uses 14 chars. Is it possible to change this?

        - for something completely different: how do you feel about splitting this
          group ? It becomes rather *impossible* to keep up with all these articles
          written to comp.os.linux. (a few suggestions: c.o.l.X11, c.o.l.compilers,
          c.o.l.archives ...)

Thanx in advance,

                Kolja

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

 
 
 

misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

Post by Drew Eckhar » Sat, 23 May 1992 06:28:43



>Some things I'm curious about:

>    - what do I need to upgrade from gcc2.1 to the latest release(2.11c?) ?
>      Do I really have to rebuild all my binaries  ?

2.11c-lib.tar.Z
2.11c-misc.tar.Z

Untar these in the appropriate place.

And if you keep the old shared library binaries, you DO NOT have to
rebuild anything.

Quote:>    - what about that 14-char-filenames-thing ? I looked into
>      /usr/src/linux/include/limits.h and found NAME_MAX 255 and
>      _POSIX_NAME_MAX 14. My system uses 14 chars. Is it possible to change this?

Yes.  You will have to do a new mkfs, and the binary distribution
kernels will not work on your system, you'll have to rebuild them
with the right parameters.

Quote:

>    - for something completely different: how do you feel about splitting this
>      group ? It becomes rather *impossible* to keep up with all these articles
>      written to comp.os.linux. (a few suggestions: c.o.l.X11, c.o.l.compilers,
>      c.o.l.archives ...)

Get a threaded news reader at your site, like trn, and you
won't have this problem - just tag the threads you are interested in,
and mark the rest as read.

 
 
 

misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

Post by Niclas B|rl » Tue, 26 May 1992 15:03:41



>    - for something completely different: how do you feel about splitting this
>      group ? It becomes rather *impossible* to keep up with all these articles
>      written to comp.os.linux. (a few suggestions: c.o.l.X11, c.o.l.compilers,
>      c.o.l.archives ...)

I'll second that.

--
Niclas Borlin

University of Umea                            phone: (+46) 90-166832
S-901 87 Umea, SWEDEN                           fax: (+46) 90-166126

 
 
 

misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

Post by Darren Se » Thu, 28 May 1992 03:09:43




> >       - for something completely different: how do you feel about splitting this
> >         group ? It becomes rather *impossible* to keep up with all these articles
> >         written to comp.os.linux. (a few suggestions: c.o.l.X11, c.o.l.compilers,
> >         c.o.l.archives ...)

> I'll second that.

I don't think this is appropriate.  What's the point of the mailing lists
otherwise?
 
 
 

misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

Post by Al Cla » Thu, 28 May 1992 04:42:29





>> > - for something completely different: how do you feel about splitting this
>> >   group ? It becomes rather *impossible* to keep up with all these articles
>> >   written to comp.os.linux. (a few suggestions: c.o.l.X11, c.o.l.compilers,
>> >   c.o.l.archives ...)

>> I'll second that.

>I don't think this is appropriate.  What's the point of the mailing lists
>otherwise?

Not all of us are interested enough in a particular topic to be on a
mailing list, but may still be interested enough to follow one or two
topics. Myself, I am following X and a couple of other things right
now, but not enough to get on the mailing list.  However, I am NOT
interested in SCSI at all.  (Yes, I know about kill files, but they use
up so much time and space resources that I avoid them.)

But using the mailing list topics as the initial set of breakouts is
probably a good start.

--

      *** Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty! ***

 
 
 

misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

Post by Kayvan Sylv » Thu, 28 May 1992 19:58:57


   (Yes, I know about kill files, but they use
   up so much time and space resources that I avoid them.)

   But using the mailing list topics as the initial set of breakouts is
   probably a good start.

I see. You don't want to use the technology available (kill files and
miscellaneous other methods) because it's personally inconvenient. Yet
you don't hesitate to break up the newsgroup, which would be an
inconvenience to a lot more people.

I vote we keep the group the same. I read it all and I don't want to
be on a gazillion mailing lists each devoted to one corner of the
Linux world.

                        ---Kayvan
--

| Consulting, Training, Development, SysAdmin, {BSD,SVr3,SVr4} Unix Systems  |
| "Think Globally, Act Locally." "Dubito ergo sum - I doubt therefore I am." |
| Proud Dad of Katherine Yelena (2.5 years) and Robin Gregory (born 2/28/92) |

 
 
 

misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

Post by n.h.chandl » Fri, 29 May 1992 10:52:57




> I see. You don't want to use the technology available (kill files and
> miscellaneous other methods) because it's personally inconvenient. Yet
> you don't hesitate to break up the newsgroup, which would be an
> inconvenience to a lot more people.

> I vote we keep the group the same. I read it all and I don't want to
> be on a gazillion mailing lists each devoted to one corner of the
> Linux world.

>                    ---Kayvan
> --

I vote we leave the group as it is!

Neville Chandler

 
 
 

misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

Post by Al Cla » Fri, 29 May 1992 11:35:55




>   (Yes, I know about kill files, but they use
>   up so much time and space resources that I avoid them.)

>   But using the mailing list topics as the initial set of breakouts is
>   probably a good start.

>I see. You don't want to use the technology available (kill files and
>miscellaneous other methods) because it's personally inconvenient. Yet
>you don't hesitate to break up the newsgroup, which would be an
>inconvenience to a lot more people.

That's not exactly what I said.  Kill files use up resources on a shared
system on this end.  I was adding a vote to a number of people who would
like to see the group further broken out, as is quite normally done when
volume gets large on newsgroups.  I don't understand the "inconvenience
to a lot of people".  Unless there's something I don't understand about
the complexity of "breaking up the news group".  comp.mail has articles
in it as well as having subgroups, for example.  I was suggesting that
the current topics (like X) could be an initial set of subgroups,
like c.o.l.X, c.o.l.scsi, and so forth.

Quote:>I vote we keep the group the same. I read it all and I don't want to
>be on a gazillion mailing lists each devoted to one corner of the
>Linux world.

>                    ---Kayvan
>--

I don't understand your point. I don't want to be on a bunch of mailing
lists either; I was agreeing with others that wanted to avoid mailing
lists and still not wade through a lot of c.o.l traffic.

Actually, if the c.o.l was "broken up", you would be able to subscribe
to all the groups, with no inconvenience I can see.  There are a few
posters that don't cross post and post to multiple groups, but I haven't
noticed very much of it.   And people could still post general info to
c.o.l


>| Consulting, Training, Development, SysAdmin, {BSD,SVr3,SVr4} Unix Systems  |
>| "Think Globally, Act Locally." "Dubito ergo sum - I doubt therefore I am." |
>| Proud Dad of Katherine Yelena (2.5 years) and Robin Gregory (born 2/28/92) |

--

      *** Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty! ***
 
 
 

misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

Post by Bob Doolitt » Fri, 29 May 1992 23:10:48



      (Yes, I know about kill files, but they use
      up so much time and space resources that I avoid them.)

      But using the mailing list topics as the initial set of breakouts is
      probably a good start.

   I see. You don't want to use the technology available (kill files and
   miscellaneous other methods) because it's personally inconvenient. Yet
   you don't hesitate to break up the newsgroup, which would be an
   inconvenience to a lot more people.

   I vote we keep the group the same. I read it all and I don't want to
   be on a gazillion mailing lists each devoted to one corner of the
   Linux world.

That's the whole point, in my view.  We already have a gazillion mailing
lists for things such as X11 and GCC, which are not posted to the net
(except in the digests of linux-activists), in order to keep the net
traffic down.  This makes joining a channel of linux-activists a tough
proposition - for context of the discussions you have to find the digests,
and pick out the messages for your channel from the digests (where they're
all grouped together in one big file), without all the nice
subject-following interface commands you're used to when reading netnews.

Al's point was to make a branch of the newsgroup for each of what is
currently a channel of linux-activists as a starting point.  This would
simplify life greatly.  Then we can make more subgroups as the need arises
(SCSI would be a good candidate, although there may already be a channel in
linux-activists for this).

-Bob
--

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Doolittle                                     Thinking Machines Corporation
(617) 234-2734                                                 245 First Street

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

 
 
 

misc questions(gcc2.11, filenames, this group)

Post by Theodore Ts' » Sat, 30 May 1992 12:53:09



   Date: 28 May 92 19:10:48 GMT

   Al's point was to make a branch of the newsgroup for each of what is
   currently a channel of linux-activists as a starting point.  This would
   simplify life greatly.  Then we can make more subgroups as the need arises
   (SCSI would be a good candidate, although there may already be a channel in
   linux-activists for this).

Keep in mind that it takes 60 days to create a new newsgroup --- 30 days
for discussion, 30 days for voting.  By that time, the nead for a
particular channel may be long gone.

Keep in mind that the original use of at least the GCC was as a place
for beta testers could get frequent updates about the state of the
world.  (And indeed GCC v2 up until very recently was changing almost
daily.)  So to put that on a mailing list, separate from comp.os.linux
is somewhat reasonable.

Yes, yes, I know, Linux is still beta software.  Personally, I would
have preferred to see all of the discussions which take place on
joker.cs.hut.fi channels take place on comp.os.linux instead, but
apparently some people seem to be more comfortable with a mailing list
instead.  Sigh....

                                        - Ted

 
 
 

1. GCC2.7.0 error: internal compiler error, got fatalsignal 11.

Hi Linux gurus,

Just installed Slackware 3.0 and about to compile and I got gcc error,
internal compiler error and got fatal signal 11. I wonder what problem
I am getting here? It is absolutely frustrating to install Linux. It
works on one box and fail the other.

Thanks in advance for your help

2. Number of inodes.

3. cc1->signal 11, misc.o Error.....huh ?

4. How to use 16bpp?

5. Complete support PC-9800 for 2.5.64-ac4 (2/11) misc core

6. Testing modem?

7. Long filenames from Novell NW4.11 volumes ?

8. Apache Connection error

9. Linux teleconference focus group 11/17

10. linux teleconference focus group 11/17

11. LOCAL: (CA,USA) Cal Linux Users Group meeting, 4/11, Berkeley CA

12. $200 Research Group About Linux in SF 4/11

13. Complete support PC-9800 for 2.5.64-ac4 (11/11) SCSI