Hi Konstantin et al, On Mon, 19 Nov 2001 16:13:33 -0800 Konstantin Olchanski <olchansk@sam.triumf.ca> wrote concerning "Re: ROOT on windows98 or 2000 ????": > On Tue, Nov 20, 2001 at 12:29:10AM +0100, Christian Holm Christensen wrote: > > > > * The worst part is Graphics. Either, one should use the Win32 stuff > > that is in ROOT, or one should use X11. Fons seem to prefer the > > later in case of Cygwin. The X11 story could be looking brighter > > now that it seems X11 has been ported to Cygwin. > > My best bet would be convince ROOT that it is being built > on a really wierd Linux system. It might take some effort to fool > autoconfig and automake, though. I looked at what I had done in terms of a conversion script, and it seems like a viable solution, though a Perl script, rather than a shell script, would probably be best. Maybe some Perl-guru could cooperate on this at some point? > > Debuggers - hmp! Who needs them? - No, just joking, though I think > > someone in the Collab once said something like (qouted from memory): > > > > Finally, I've tried the M$VC debugger, and I was not impressed. > > Essentially it's too clumbersome for my taste. > > Well, a debugger is like a software oscilloscope (the thing with 4 BNC > inputs, a tiny screen and 100 little twirly knobs). > > It is just that "if()" statements are more reliable than LeCroy > discriminators so you can get away without using a real debugger tool, > most of the time (and there are no LeCroy "printf()" NIM modules). > > While the MSVC debugger has a very steep learning curve, so do the new > fancy scopes, and so do most powerful tools. > > (But note that rotten software (i.e. everything Windows) requires > using these fancy debuggers-on-steroids). LOL! > > As for VMS - what is that? Something from the stoneages ... > > > > ... The kid looks even more puzzled, and finally > > ask her father "Dad, does that mean that companies made software, > > and made money off it? ..." > > Right on the money- DEC made no money on software, so VMS, DEC, c|o|m|p|a|q > are (and HPaq soon will be) history. ... and be taken over by autonymous small groups of people doing OpenSource projects (it's election day in DK, so it's a time for grand dreams and predictions on the future :-) What Digital did with VMS, was to bundle the OS with the Hardware, much like Digital did with OSF, HP did with HP-UX, and IBM with DOS. In that way, you did pay for VMS, OSF, and HP-UX. The license of OpenVMS [1] clearly states that you can not redistribute, reverse-engineer, deassemble, and so on. I believe you could obtain a source license which allowed you took _look_ at the source code, but not redistribute any changes - in a sense what M$ SharedSource License allows you to do. And ofcourse you have to _buy_ those licenses. Very much propertary code. What Digital OSF, and Compaq later continued, and HP done with HP-UX, is more or less the same, starting from the (stupid) BSD license (which for some reason is deemed OpenSource) and making their changes propetary. BTW, I saw on Compaq's home page that someone is planning/have to port VMS to Intels Itanium chip [2]. So I guess someone out there really like being nostalgic, just like people keep porting Amiga 500 and Commador 64 games to Linux, Windoze, MacOS, and so on :-) > Hmm... if Linux were so great, people would not keep adding VMS > features to it all the time. Ahem, one day we may even have *real* > linux clusters! I'll gladly admit that Linux does not provide the best possible environment for Clusters - for that, you need a really well-designed OS like GNU/Hurd (Ok, I'm a bit of Hurd biggot, so what!), which supports the concept of multiple processors rigoursly. Be at as it may, Linux has after all proven it's worth in clusters. Large things like Toy Story (I+II) was rendered on Linux farms. BTW, Bruce Perens of Pixar is a Debian maintainer (and once distribution coordinater) - he's the reason why all Debian releases carry codenames that are taken from the Toy Story characters, for example bo, hamm, potato, and the upcomming woody. Which VMS features are you talking about? I'm merely curious, and not so certain wether it's not actually Un*x features that was ported to VMS, and then to Linux. > > My only regret about all that, is that Digital didn't managed to > > promote their superiour chip technology to the desktop (or personal > > computer, or even PC) market. So now we stuck with these sh**ty i386 > > chips! > > Agreed- DEC kill off the Alpha CPU technology is the biggest calamity > of recent memory, in the computing world. Here at NBI, our group still has 3 Alpha machines (the one I'm writting from is actually a Digital Unix on an Alpha chip). I'd love to get my hands on one of those and install Linux and/or Hurd on one of those :-) Yours, Christian Holm Christensen ------------------------------------------- Address: Sankt Hansgade 23, 1. th. Phone: (+45) 35 35 96 91 DK-2200 Copenhagen N Cell: (+45) 28 82 16 23 Denmark Office: (+45) 353 25 305 Email: cholm@nbi.dk Web: www.nbi.dk/~cholm [1] http://www.montagar.com/hobbyist/register_license.html [2] http://www.openvms.compaq.com/presentations/cets2001/CETS2001-1619_IPFAPPPORT.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Nov 20 2001 - 08:45:35 EST