AltME groups: search

using different version of the same lib just because they have a 
different name is something you can do in any os. a newer version 
of a library should *always* be compatible with older software, so 
that you never need to have two versions.

If the rpm is for your redhat and has a 2.3, install it? after lots 
of backups maybe, i guess if the lib fails all fails. or unzip it 
and put the library somewhere else and use LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Do you 
have a link to the package?

Volker: so basically a software developer in linux does not distribute 
to users, but to distro makers, which in turn distribute to users? 
See, it's evil. Things should just run. That's how it worked on Amiga...

I mean, it's a system running in a data-center, and I really have 
to have this system up and running.

Gabriele: No, a software-maker distributes sourcecode to experts 
until somebody things that academic system should be marketed as 
windows-competition :)

Amiga had a different design. In my experience, if you work against 
the design, you have problems. In linux case, the design is "distribute 
as source". If that works bad, its evil. If binaries works bad, thats 
bad luck..

Robert: it might be easy to pick a new box and move data. But, the 
effort to make REBOL  work is probably much smaller.

(I don't have a RH7.2 box to test this out, otherwise I'd give you 
more details on how you could make it work.)

Can the datacenter give a temporary second box?

Robert: like Volker, my prefered path fro a mostly read  dataserver 
would be setup/test/populate new_data_server; stop updates on old_data_server 
switch nameserver to new_data_server

A well, this is too bad. The Debian distro is on DVD, but the computer 
does not have a DVD, only CDROM.

I've scanned the Debian docs, which are quite good, but found no 
mention of how to create a CDROM from the DVDROM.

Sniffing around, it looks like they merged all the CDROM pool files 
into a single huge main directory.

So, there goes the idea of pulling out a single CDROM image somehow... 
unless I can figure out the package dependencies.

I suppose perhaps the alternative is to build a boot floppy and install 
over FTP from the box that has the dvdrom. It's been years since 
I had to do that. Too bad Debian doesn't provide a little script 
to cut CDROMS from the DVD. I've got to guess I'm not the only person 
with this issue.

And you have to wonder why they need a 10GB distro. "Just give me 
the main system and libs please" - no bloatedness, thanks.

You could go with Knoppix or Ubuntu, which are both debian-based, 
but fit on a floppy.

It's not a great dev system.

The libc bits on an up-to-date "Red Hat Enterprise Linux WS (v. 3 
for x86)"  
 


-rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root      1144368 Mar 24  2004 libstdc++-2-libc6.1-1-2.9.0.so

-rw-r--r--    1 root     root       426620 Mar 24  2004 libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.a

-r-xr-xr-x    1 root     root       408440 Mar 24  2004 libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so

lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           30 Dec 22  2004 libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 
-> libstdc++-2-libc6.1-1-2.9.0.so

lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           30 Dec 22  2004 libstdc++-libc6.2-2.a.3 
-> libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.a

lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           31 Dec 22  2004 libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 
-> libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so

lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           20 Dec 22  2004 libstdc++.so.2.7.2 
-> libstdc++.so.2.7.2.8

-rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root      1025339 Mar 24  2004 libstdc++.so.2.7.2.8

lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           18 Dec 22  2004 libstdc++.so.2.8 
-> libstdc++.so.2.8.0

-rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root       375773 Mar 24  2004 libstdc++.so.2.8.0

lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           22 Dec 22  2004 libstdc++.so.2.9 
-> libstdc++.so.2.9.dummy

-rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root         5428 Mar 24  2004 libstdc++.so.2.9.dummy

lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           18 Sep 29 18:51 libstdc++.so.5 
-> libstdc++.so.5.0.3

-rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root       709456 Jul 19  2005 libstdc++.so.5.0.3

This may be a wild goose hunt. Hard to say. I'd just like to have 
something a bit more standard for our Linux distro.

Carl, you can download a minimal installation CD for Debian that 
will install extra packages over the Internet:

Personally I would temporarily hook up a DVD drive to that machine, 
though

Another, easy, option would be MEPIS Linux. It's much closer to Debian 
than Ubuntu, although based on a newer version than the stable version. 
And very easy to install

Well as I said befor... Slackware and debian are the only two with 
unmodified lib and kernel structures.. and are great development 
envs...a pitty though about that dvd from debian..

people who startout using Ubuntu, Fedora or Redhat find themselfs 
In an Linux world that not even default with i.e. Disk-Structures 
on Tru64 or Solaris or HPUX.. while using other Linux distributions 
from around 1995 they stick with the UNIX system (IV|V) layout..But 
when it comes to development I can emagine to make a choice between 
"package handling" and "environment handling"... Then I would stick 
with debian..just has a better package manager...where slackware 
is a little more the "do it yourself package manager.." still 'tar 
does wonderful things.. for the user...

Knoppix can be installed and is is then a debian, so the rest can 
be apt-getted. damn small linux claims the same. Kanotix is a knoppix 
specially made for that. no guaratees..

Let me back up a bit.  No Linux wars here please.  I have about 10 
different Linux distros running..

So, I studied the situation a bit, and found that Debian is really 
the meat behind a lot of these distros, and someone I trust suggested 
that Debian made a better dev platform and would provide the perfect 
build standard for us.

But, I do not have a DVD on the target machine, only CDROM. The distro 
is on DVD, so I need to create a CDROM set from the DVD.

I searched far and wide on the net, and found no info at all on how 
to do this.  I even wrote a REBOL script as a mini Linux package 
manager, because boiling down 10GB to .7GB is no small task.

But, it became clear to me that the package database does not appear 
specific enough to be able to generate a solid set of packages in 
that manner.

I also built the floppy set, and figured I would use my own local 
Debian archivel site from a different local machine.  So, mounted 
the DVD on one system and published it with HTTP, and the floppy 
boot worked, found the host, but the installer rejected the archive.

what is the problem to buy a dvd drive these days? :-) It is really 
cheap even here in CZ :-)

Carl, you can buy Debian for $30 at http://www.1stdebian.com/, but 
at that price you can also buy a DVD Drive for your target mmachine 
;-)

the problem is that normally a person makes a program and then multiple 
maintainers make sure it runs under certain distros

Yes, and look how nice open source has become these days.  It is 
a huge mess.

But, the last thing I do is start taking the hardware box apart for 
a simple software install problem.

Carl, a suggestion: why not make an agreement with trusted Rebol/Linux 
users and delegate the build on specific platform. Kind of very restricted 
and contractuel "Open Source"?

I fully agree Carl.. Long life the "spaggeti Open Source Community" 
....Windows rules ;-) on some parts...it realy does!.... (and Im 
a fanatic Unix/Linux user..)..I was struggling for 2 days with my 
DVD drives for a simple 1-on-1 copy (none data) ..and none of the 
Linux packages where able to correclty copy DVD's of  my format.. 
Jumping back to windows XP (i though ..iekss) ..seeking some obscure 
sites and found a hell of a tool that copy's everything.."dvd decrypter" 
(EOL btw but free..) And that something linux community did not build 
yet...Awfull.. Well im off taking care of some windows backups ;-) 
It still stays windows ;-)

COS - Carl's open source :-) Rebol with a cause :-)

I do not want to download anything from the net, nor should that 
be necessary..
 I think thats the main problem, specially with debian..

 and found that Debian is really the meat behind a lot of these distros

 thats right. Which is why i suggested knoppix. Which is a debian 
 modified to run from cd without needing harddisk. Which was lthen 
 modified to dump itself to hd as debian-installation. Which is a 
 nice way to install debian IMHO.

I am willing to give new Knoppix or Ubuntu a try - what do you suggest 
please for small, 1CD intro, which is able to easily mount your NTFS 
partition and let's you to delete windows, program files, or simply 
to back-up some files and does not screw your filesystem?

Writing to NTFS is always a problem on Linux, though

i have another partition with a clean windows install, to use for 
repair opeartions on ntfs.

I think part of the "mess" of OSS is the perception that it is a 
single movement, a unified army of developers. That is completely 
wrong, even though some of the louder proponents of open source work 
hard to make you believe exactly that. Even folks who understand 
the truth have their perceptions colored by all the from the Eric 
Raymonds and Richard Stallmans of the world. Then they wonder how 
this OSS army is going to take over the world when they can't get 
their act together and produce easily usable apps written in clear 
code. Individual developers and teams do all the time, but that's 
hardly an army.

all the ... from the Eric Raymonds


A little unintentional self-censoring there, but I'll let you fill 
in the blank on your own ;)

It is amazing how we Open Source can divide people. There is gray 
all over the place and this is not a black and white issue. I think 
this is not about the armies of developers, or the quality, but about 
the ability to move fwd and construct on the disclosure of code. 
For as much bad applications there are in Open Source, there are 
good ones, OpenBSD, GCC, Postgress, and the one Rebol incorporated 
AGG.

Brian, exactly. The fact that MS still dominates the world of OS 
and Apps when there is so much OSS is a very good example.

If you want a really good example, check this one out. Abiword.

I thought it was a great work at first, because people would not 
need to buy Word anymore. But, the more you use it, the more problems 
you have.

So I would not say that open source model is bad or better that the 
proprietary model when producing quality applications. They are just 
models. The advantage of Open Source is that some day in the future 
anybody digging on an scavation in america will find an OpenBSD or 
Linuxe Source CD and my be able to learn from that src code. Because 
there is a mass of distribution of this CDs and it is available wideley, 
I think people will avoid reinventing the wheel. Which usually happens 
when a proprietary project go bust, and the only ramains are in tapes 
in a vault where nobody knows the *pearls* that it contatins.

cause I'm basically hacking away at a working version and breaking 
it completely, hoping to patch it up and get it working with more 
features and cleaned up afterwards.

to do a rebol debugger

liquidator's first module I wish to build is  a REBOL IDE.  so that 
means...  a decent editor, code compositing, concurrent souce version 
control... right on the source without CVS (no need), notes, unit 
testing, etc... and debugging, when possible.

but that means you are running the code within a liquid node...

I am talking about a real debugger, where you actually DO the code 
hands off.

with liquid management of code, we can easily alter whole script 
at the flick of a switch, to add thousands of lines to allow debugging.

but for some functions this can be fatal, so its a tricky game... 
which needs a lot of thought... so I will be going at it one step 
at a time.

first give a solid dev platform, then add some debugging help.  unit 
testing alone is trivial to implement in liquid, so that's a very 
good path for a first pass.

eye brows I guess?  like a vertical emoticon?

i've worked a bit on an MSX emulator in Rebol

it's a try

yes i wrote a parser to convert Z80 opcodes into rebol instructions

it's just a try

you should have done so for a C64!  we'd have 100000 rebol games!!!

its actually quite functional... there are a few gfx issues... but 
its REALLY cool.  :-)

yes but to achieve this project and doing a real emulator, i need 
rebcode

a little bit

by a very fast scan... this pretty much sums up liquid.

just cursory, i need to familiarize myself with rebol a little more

you look like you are getting a lot of good mileage out of it though

liquidator is a good test bed for the engine, and so far, I have 
changed nothing in the design of liquid itself, I just keep improving 
how I link stuff and manage the liquid nodes themselves.

so... its a bit tough at first, cause you can't just go in and start 
off quickly... especially since some coding practices have to change 
to adapt to the paradigm... but in the end, you have no cleanup phase. 
 so its a fair tradeoff...

I implemented a simple session login with a neophyte on this list... 
and it was a good learning experience for both  :-)

it just turns programming upside down and you have to think so differently 
that some impossible things are just plain trivial, and stupidly 
easy things become a design nightmare!

just like you can't just leave a gear loose inside a car's transmission 
for "whenever it might be needed"

Just did a little research on programmatically controled I/O blocking 
(on demand) for a liquid node :-)


 this is very powerfull as it allows you to trigger your node's messaging 
 only when some of the inputs are in specific states.  making the 
 engine able to prevent downstream nodes (observers) from knowing 
 about upstream data changes, when they are not usefull.

also since we have explicit knowledge of dirtyness of data, we can 
block I/O explicitely before or after some inputs have processed... 
 so if you have  a 'hide state for example, actually changing that 
state can send (or not)  an update, so that the other inputs get 
used when it un blocks... and any one needing the value, will get 
the modified values, which where stored while the node was blocked 
 :-)  no data is lost, its only dormant.

applying this to a gui driven with liquid nodes, you could freeze 
the the whole layout on a modal window... and let your inputs continue 
to process in the background... updating animation, and reacting 
to async reads... for exacmple.


when you unfreeze the gui and call a refresh of the gui plug, all 
the data which was being processed in the background, is now automatically 
available ,as if nothing had been frozen and a simple update of the 
node, will refresh you gui with nothing to manage.

it has a primitive version of the glob engine.  It has grown since, 
but keeps the same basic idea.

AS A TEASER FOR DEVCON... HERE IS THE FIRST EVER PUBLIC SCREEN SHOT 
OF ELIXIR !


http://www.pointillistic.com/open-REBOL/moa/steel/elixir/elixir_0_3_5.png

thanks  :-)  took a bit of tweaking to get the stuff sorted out, 
but I'm starting to get the hang of AGG.

Yes, looks good.  


May I suggest doing a "bright version" (white BG...etc.  As if Mac 
designed this...)


Although the dramatic colours always look striking, in the long run 
people tend to prefer the light colours so that they can use them 
easier in print and slide shows.

thanks!


yes, its always a matter of user useage, in the graphic editing world 
all the high-end apps use a dark scheme...

but the colours are totally editable... it might take a few initial 
releases before I allow them to be editable in the API but internally 
all of that is very easy to change.

Elixir is a first shot at redefining the concept of you workspace.

I'm using a node graph as the basis for ALL system operations.  for 
now, I'm just finishing the core framework, so the "tools" part is 
not yet in place, but I'll have a nice demo to open up the future 
of elixir.

I'll ask a question... what do you do on your computer?  well that 
is all of what elixir will be able to do once all the elements are 
in place.

watching video, editing photos, chatting on icq, altme, a little 
bit of rebol coding, browsing web :-)

the difference is in the loss of the "software" as a monolithic entity 
which modify files.

the second module I'll be building for elixir. is a rebol IDE.

or even a menu system ... would look cool in 3D, openGLed :-)

each node can be anything... a code block, a text prepropressor, 
a function def.

the cool thing is the cross application capabilities.... need to 
insert a pic in a button... hum.. just use the output of the image 
creating node and plug it in the image input of a button.

I can say I have probably helped Cyphre into a few decisions, which 
are old requests of mine.

(obviously, liquid's lazy computing goes a long way into that.)

AFAICT the whole view will be opensource, so could probably retro 
fit a lot of !

If I decided to go ahead with OpenGL and Elixir, using GLASS as the 
design... what is left of REBOL but the syntax and the interpreter 
anyways?  I'd rather have the tool running on steroids without being 
tied to a chain.

I wonder if other languages could benefit from View? I know they 
have e.g. wxWidgets, but not sure how easy would it be to integrate? 
Maybe with R3 as a whole, pythonists can link/load "rebol library" 
to do so :-) View simply needs rebol interpreter ...

I did a VID dialect in Python... worked exactly like GLayout with 
the proportional resizing.