Subj : fantasy & folklore pt2
To   : Charles Angelich
From : David Drummond
Date : Wed Nov 28 2001 11:27 pm

Charles

28 Nov 01 03:44, Charles Angelich wrote to David Drummond:

 DD>>>>>> Go for Linux, whole hog. 

 CA>>> Seems odd advice considering what you have said about your
 CA>>> own setup below? 

 DD>> It would be more convenient if I could compile the nodelist
 DD>> on the Linux system. The Linux nodelist compiler code
 DD>> requires a later version of Linux than what I have on this
 DD>> machine. Other than that, this machine/OS version does
 DD>> everything else I require of it, I'm not inclined to muck
 DD>> with it. 

 CA> Wouldn't this also be true for others you counsel to "Go for
 CA> Linux, whole hog"? 

He expressed an interest to change.

 CA> To "reinstall" W9x you would be using DOS. You can't reinstall
 CA> a nonexistent OS to itself. AFAIK Linux doesn't restore W9x. 

I would boot from the Windows CD. Sure this would load some sort of DOS, but 
then, Windows (98) is based and runs on DOS

 DD>> In order to make a transition from DOS to Linux, one MUST
 DD>> be running DOS in the first place. Eventually, when one has
 DD>> transferred everything, the DOS is redundant. 

 CA> Redundant until the wonder-OS hit's the fan. Then it restores
 CA> what you had and the cycle repeats. 

One then boots from the Linux startup diskettes and continues.

 DD>> The only reason I "rely" on DOS is because I'm too lazy to
 DD>> re-install my Linux machine. It's been running for a few
 DD>> years now without any hassles (other than that Nodelist
 DD>> Compiler). 

 CA> You make it sound as though installing newer releases is not an
 CA> easy task even for those who believe they understand Linux
 CA> installs? 

It isn't that hard to upgrade. It's some of the funny Fidonet apps I've got on 
there that I linger. It seems these things are very sensitive to the version of 
Linux one is running (in regard to which libraries they (the Fidonet apps) were 
written for).

Currently it all (other than the superfluous nodelist compiler) works. I see no 
need to upgrade this machine's OS.

As I install another machine with Linux, I will be more likely to use a much 
later version.

 DD>> The reason for the LAN between the Linux machine and the
 DD>> Windows machines here is to add features to the Windows
 DD>> machine(s). 

 CA>>> DOS is the ghost in our machines! 

 DD>> In some it has been exorcised. 

 CA> It continues to exist in your own setup and probably the
 CA> majority of other systems as well. 

It is not a necessary part of my setup.

The Linux machines at work have NO DOS installed on them. They do share 
resources in a manner that DOS based Windows workstations may access them.

Regards,
David

--- Msged/LNX TE 06 (pre)
 * Origin: Here (3:640/305)

.