| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2005/3/15-17 [Computer/SW/OS/Linux] UID:36694 Activity:low |
3/15 I'm trying to install rpms and as I go down the dependency chain,
it keeps saying "Failed dependencies:
A.so is needed by B
C is needed by D"
Now, I can go ahead and install C, but A.so is a file within the
RPM that already exists on the system. I can --force install, but
I'm not so sure that this is such a good idea. What would you do
in this case?
\_ I would clarify the question.
\_ Find out what RPM provides A.so. I think that rpm -qpl <file>
will give you that info (look in the man page to get the
correct options). Then you can decide if you want to remove
the old A.so and install the one in C.
\_ Remove linux and install a real OS.
\_ Why is Linux not a real OS?
\_ because it works.
\_ Yes, like Windows NT. |
| 2005/3/15-16 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:36695 Activity:high |
3/15 It's been a while since I bought a notebook. Is there any reason to
pay extra $100 to upgrade from XP Home to XP Professional? How about
Intel Pentium M Processor 7x5, do they run at decent speed relative
to say, P4? And what's the difference between 1) Crystal View XGA TFT
and 2) SXGA+ non-crystal view TFT? ok thx
\_ You definitely want a Pentium M for the power savings.
\_ XGA = 1024x768, SXGA = 1400x1050
CrystalView is just the name they gave to a better LCD; don't get
the last gen LCD
\_ Comparing a 1024 and a 1400 IBM screen, the 1024 is brighter with
slightly slower refresh, and the 1400 has a very wide viewing
angle, but less brightness when viewed Head-on.
\_ Home has problems working with more than I think 5 computers on a
LAN and has a bunch of other esoteric cripplings that make it
unusable by most businesses. For home use, 'Home' is fine.
YMWTS: http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/pro/howtobuy/choosing2.mspx
\_ How about dialing in and running VPN to access corporate network?
Does Home work in this case?
\_ Clock-for-clock, 7xx Pentium Ms do more work that Pentium 4s.
The 7xx series also use a lot less power, which means better
battery life and cooler thighs. Pentium M is lower voltage, lower
frequency, bigger cache, and shorter pipeline.
\_ Generally, multiply the Pentium M frequency by 1.5 to get the
equivalent Pentium 4 frequency. So a 2.0 Ghz Pentium M is like
a 3.0 GHz Pentium 4.
Anyway, you definitely do not want a Pentium 4 notebook.
Runs too hot, uses too much power, notebooks are too heavy, they'll
break from all that -- it's a desktop CPU.
\_ Pentium 4: Desktop CPU, very hot, high power and clock rate
Pentium 4M: Pentium 4 at lower voltage and power
Pentium M/Centrino/7xx: Different design philosophy, very low
power, lower clock rate but more work per cycle.
\_ FYI, they don't make the Pentium 4 Mobile anymore
Also, the Pentium M not only has a different design
philosophy, it was engineered from the ground up as a mobile
CPU.
\_ XP Home does not have IIS. Pro does for development purposes.
\_ M$ is really good at bundling things and defying antitrust laws.
\_ My gf wants a cheap laptop(against my advice.) Are there any
significant difference between Celeron M 360 and Pentium M 725?
Besides the cache I mean. I'm mainly interested in performance
and battery usage.
\_ http://www.tabletpcreviewspot.com/default.asp?newsID=178
Celeron M's are Pentium M's with half the L2 cache and no
SpeedStep (always runs at the list frequency).
See the article for more details.
Pentium M > Celeron M >> Pentium 4
\_ Cool. Thanks for the link. Her older celeron laptop was
dog slow, but this page looks good. -pp |
| 2005/3/15-17 [Computer/SW/WWW/Browsers] UID:36696 Activity:low |
3/15 Anyone know of something like spook.el that runs autonomously of
emacs under Windows, and which can be used to append garbage sigs
to Mozilla mail?
\_ get a life.
\_ Go fuck yourself. Next?
\_ Great, now he'll want to marry himself next. Way to go.
\_ I don't think he can legally marry himself -- so I guess
you could say he has the same rights as everyone else. |
| 2005/3/15-16 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:36697 Activity:very high |
3/15 A few months ago, the East Bay Express had an excellent article
profiling six same-sex couples who got married during the time SF
was issuing licenses.
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/issues/2004-10-13/news/feature_1.html.
If you can read this article and still oppose gay marriage, you have
no soul. These are human beings, just trying to live their lives.
-tom
\_ I hate gays because they have subverted so many English words like
"gay". And "fruity". And "queer". Fucking homos.
"gay". And "fruity". And "queer". And "pirate". Fucking homos.
\_ I thought it was my fellow het's who did this. ashamed. --het
\_ I can probably find equally convincint stories about father/daughter
brother/sister mother/son.
\_ if they can share the pain of going thru child birthing together
then okay..
\_ i guess couples with fertility problems are not okay.
\_ or couples over age of 60.
\_ Ah, tom. Always the paragon of tolerance. "If you don't agree
with me, you have no soul!"
\_ Ah, anonymous coward with the ad hominem attack. Did you read
the article? -tom
\_ I read it when it came out. I never said if I was for or
against gay marriage did I? I'm just pointing out that
your statement is stupid on it's face. BTW, that's not
ad hominem.
\_ There is something karmic about an obvious grammar error in
a clause which begins with "your statement is stupid". -tom
\_ Same sex marriage always results in the Best Motd
Discussions.
\_ Dude, someone just called tom a "stupid face". Apparently
the CSUA is allowing junior high school students to join.
\_ So, your whole argument is "tom sux." Could you just post that
and save us all the drama? --erikred
\_ tom, why are you wasting your time convincing us that same sex
marriage is not evil? Almost everyone on motd is liberal and
tolerate same sex marriage. The exception would be the religious
Christians and Mormons, and you can't possibly convert them. So
why waste your time. -evil satanic liberal who agrees with tom
\_ BTW, Mormons are Christians. -emarkp
\_ Only Mormons think this.
\_ Oh, Mormons are Christians...they're just wrong.
-Snide Catholic Troll
\_ Now that's more like it. -emarkp
\_ Sign your name troll. -emarkp (And this is a false
statement you're trolling with.)
\_ It's a false statement to you because you are
Mormon. Do any non-Mormons think this?
\_ I work with several non-Mormon Christians in my
office, and they have told me that they consider me a
Christian. Since we talk about the Bible and Christ
as a group a lot, I'm not surprised. -emarkp
\_ I posted it because it is the best portrayal of the reality
of the issue that I've seen; that gays are not trying to subvert
the institution of marriage, or overthrow society, but are just
trying to enjoy some of the same rights that the rest of us
take for granted. And that one of those rights is the right
to get "married," not "civil unionized." I think there are
still reasonable people who believe that gay marriage is not
OK but civil unions are; I think that's a cop-out position.
[For the record, I'm neither gay nor married.] -tom
\_ Remarkably, I don't think gays are "trying to subvert the
institution of marriage, or overthrow society." But the
argument "they're just trying to get the same rights as
everyone else" avoids debate and trivializes the issue. It's
the equivalent of "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve"--just the
other side of the issue. -emarkp
\_ I don't see your point. They *are* just trying to get the
same rights as everyone else. How is that avoiding
debate or trivializing the issue? I think the issue is
totally fundamental. -tom
\_ I've heard that "Adam and Steve" crap since I was a little
kid at the Christian school I went to. You are a fucking
bigot Mark.
\_ Huh? Try re-reading the post. He says that's a
stupid thing to say. Sheesh.
\_ Wow! pp really hates gay marriage! emarkp says
the phrase about "Adam and Steve" is dumb, and this
guy calls him a bigot! Bravo!
\_ Bad comparison (my fault). The typical response is that
they do have the same rights as anyone else. A gay man
can marry a woman just like a straight man can. Now
can we both agree that your statement and this
counterstatement are equally useless? -emarkp
\_ No we can't. The response is a stupid response.
As was mentioned before the argument could be
rephrased to deny mixed race (for the commonly
used version of race) marriages because then
everyone has the same rights, the right to marry
a member of the same race.
\_ I concur. -tom
\_ But then the pro-SSM side argument can be disputed
by pointing out that not everyone else can marry.
We have restrictions on who can marry left and
right (close relatives, adults/minors, etc.).
-emarkp
\_ So the debate is more Pro: "Gays
should have the same rights as heteros."
Anti: "No they shouldn't." The problem
when put in those terms it is hard for the
Anti side to keep pretending it isn't being
prejudiced, and so the anti side conviently
tries to pretend there are other issues at
stake. Embrace your true nature and just
admit that you don't think gay people deserve
the same rights as everyone else.
\_ They do have the same rights. I can't marry
someone of my own gender and neither can
they.
\_ Hello Mr. Trees, you seemed to have
missed the forest for yourself. -dans
\_ I used to think this argument was just
hypothetical. But I forgot that Mormons
actually hold out hope that they can marry
their brothers/sisters, have sex with their
daughters, etc. So, good point emarkp.
\_ Woo! Where would we be without the
clueless anti-mormon troll?
\_ The response is not stupid. The comparison
btwn gay marriage and mix-race marriage is
flawed. The denial of marriage rights to a
mix-race couple was based on a false concept
of race. The denial of marriage rights to
gays is not based on any such false concept.
Gays want more rights than other people in
society and there is no compelling reason
to grant them these rights.
\_ What more rights? You will have the
right to marry the same sex as well.
And mix-race marriages were illegal because
it was against the laws of nature. We don't
do that sort of thing. Ick! Oh my god
that is wrong and an abomination. That is
for the same reason you oppose gay marriage.
\_ You really don't understand the
arugment do you?
My opposition to gay marriage has
nothing to do with the law of
nature (by these I'm assuming you
mean something like maxwell's laws
or the uncertainty principle,
which couldn't care less whether
a person is gay or not).
My opposition to gay marriage is
based on the fact that there is
no basis on which to claim that
these people have been denied a
right that all other people w/
their same real characteristics
have. (Mixed-race is irrelevant
to the discussion b/c race is
not a real characteristic, please
go read some human evolutionary
studies, if you think that race
is really a true concept).
If two gay people are allowed
to marry, then why should a
schizophrenic not be able to
marry herself and claim a dual
tax deduction? What about a
person and his imaginary best
friend?
BTW, I don't want more rights,
I'm perfectly happy w/ the rights
I have.
\_ including, apparently, the right to
be a complete fucking moron. -tom
\_ If anyone but tom had posted this, it would have slid by with
no comment. Oh, wait, ilyas, John, and emarkp have their
tormenters as well.
\_ And funny enough, I don't think any of "us" take them at all
seriously. Frankly, I'm a bit worried about both ChiCom
Troll and heil cherman john guy--I hope they're ok, I haven't
seen them around. After all, an integral part of being a
responsible troll farmer is paying good attention to your pet
trolls' well-being! That said, I think both ilyas and
emarkp are occasionally full of shit, but there seems to be
an interesting tendency for people who stand behind their
arguments and who sign their names to attract morons.. -John
\_ And speaking of motd regulars, where's BDG to rant for half
a screen about how gay marriage will allow gay people to
ruin the lives of other gay people?
\_ I discovered you are actually a closet commie, so I no
longer troll you - Chicom Troll
\_ Well, there's a price to be paid for being a consistent
asshole. I don't give a shit about tom being a fag. I have
fags for friends. tom's just an asshole. If I ever met him
I'd pound his face into the street, clear and simple.
Being a gay misanthrope doesn't excuse him of anything.
\_ I'm usually the last one to say this, but post your
name, tough guy. --erikred
\_ use kchang's intellicrap.
\_ the what? what does it do?
\_ blames ilyas for everything.
\_ This is pretty funny. Run it through b1ff for it to be
taken extra-serious! -John
\_ Vell, zeere's a preece-a tu be-a peeed fur beeeng a
cunseestent esshule-a. I dun't geefe-a a sheet ebuoot tum
beeeng a feg. I hefe-a fegs fur freeends. tum's joost un
esshule-a. Iff I ifer met heem I'd puoond hees fece-a intu
zee street, cleer und seemple-a. Beeeng a gey
meesunthrupe-a duesn't ixcoose-a heem ooff unytheeng.
\_ I don't oppose same-sex civil unions, but I think marriage
is a religious institution and should not be in the dominion
of the government. A priest can already 'marry' two gay
people. We're talking about the government, in which case
I think 'marriage' is the wrong term to use. --dim
\_ In which case, we should abolish the use of the term
"marriage" in any secular description of a contractual
binding of two consenting adults. Go ahead and start that
movement, then report back on how that works for you.
\_ Well, then failing that I am opposed to using the
term 'marriage' to describe same-sex unions. |
| 2005/3/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:36698 Activity:high |
3/15 Are they going to grill Michael Jackson as well or is he just
going to sit behind his army of lawyers and let them do all
the talking?
\_ it is extremely unlikely they'll have jackson take the stand.
\_ why? how can he not?
\_ because putting nutjobs on the stand is a good way to get
them exposed as nutjobs. -tom
\_ Yes, but nutjobs often don't listen to their lawyers.
\_ I know why they don't want MJ to take the stand.
What I am asking is can they do that? This is all
about fair and balance, how can he not take the
stand? (or rather, why would the law allow him not to
take the stand?) If you grill hard enough on any rape
victims, you are bound to find some thing. This just
seems a little strange.
\_ It is fairly common for criminal defendants not to
testify on their own behalf. I've known some public
defenders who routinely advise their clients not to
testify. -tom
\_ Because of the 5th Ammendment of the US Constitution.
"nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a
witness against himself..."
\_ Ah, that nonsense...
\_ I do believe he should be required to take the
stand, and can say "I have nothing to say about
that" for all questions. But required to take the
stand.
\_ The prosecution can call him as a hostile witness
if they want to, but that would probably be seen as
a grandstanding ploy. -tom
\_ he'll plead the fizzif. one two three four fiiiiif!
\_ because of 5th amendment, prosecution can't really force
him to testify, so only reason he might testify is if his
defense lawyers thought was a good idea.
\_ This is the same thing as the "self incrimination" thing
that we hear from cop dramas, right?
\_ 5th Amendment
"No person shall be held to answer for a capital,
or otherwise infamous, crime, unless on a
presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except
in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or
in the militia, when in actual service, in time of
war, or public danger; nor shall any person be
subject, for the same offence, to be twice put in
jeopardy of life or limb;
nor shall be
compelled, in any criminal case, to be a witness
against himself;
nor be deprived of life,
liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor shall private property be taken for public
use, without just compensation."
\_ About not being tried twice for the same offence,
what if the subject was found not guilty, and then
some new evidence is found later showing that he's
guilty?
\_ That's the idea. The prosecution has to hold
off on bringing charges until they think they
have enough to convict. Otherwise you could
have someone on trial over and over again for
the same offence as prosecuters keep
'discovering' evidence they should have
presented at the first trial. Now if new
evidence of a similar but distinct crime turns
up, then you can be retried.
\- unless the new evidence points to a "new
crime" it is over. so in theory
you could even confess once you have been
found innocent. however there are some not
very self-evident details about what
constitutes the same crime, there may be
state/federal issues, you can still be
sued in tort possibly etc. you can also\
read about "jury nullification", directed
verdicts, with/without prejudice dismissal.
oh and obviously this doenst apply in the
case of a mistrial. the double jeopardy
issue was run around in the OJ case.
\_ Uh, it's still double jeopardy. How did all
you people who've never heard of the fifth
amendment get into Berkeley?
\- If you are talking about the Miranda warning, the
decision of Miranda v. Az is sort of procedural rather
than substantive decision. The essence was "you have
to let suspects in custody know what their rights are"
rather than an expansion of the right against
self-incrimination. This is in contrast to a more
subtantive decision like Gideon v. Wainwright, which
says the right to counsel include an obligation for
the state to provide counsel for indigents. There
are a lot of intersting cases relating to self-
incrimination. YMWTGF: christian burial speech. --psb
\_ I'm surprised the racist-against-Mexicans guy isn't
frothing at the mouth and posting another anti-
immigration freeper storm in response to this
thread.
\_ tnx for the suggestion (re "christian burial"). An
interesting case which I hadn't seen before. As
usual, I think the dissent has it right. -crebbs
\- somewhat interestingly, there are two brewer v.
williams cases. the first one involves the
"appeal to conscience" issue, and the second
one promotes the "inevitable discovery" doc-
trine. the evolution of the exclusionary rule
is also pretty interesting. --psb
\_ It's called "Pleading the 5th". |
| 2005/3/15-17 [Politics/Foreign, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:36699 Activity:nil |
3/15 tell me if you want pointers to foreign bond (long
and short) fund, foreign reit fund, foreign utility fund,
foreign inflation indexed debt fund.
\_ I am interested in this. -ausman
\_ same here, please tell us how. I don't want to keep money
in useless US Money Market account since US dollar sucks.
\_ ditto -nivra
\_ No need to be mysterious. Just buy Dodge and Cox international.
6% YTD. Average return of about 12% since 1968 or so.
\_ Here you go:
http://tinyurl.com/627hr
The above article talks about has BGT, MFD, IGR, EGLRX
The above article talks about BGT, MFD, IGR, EGLRX
Interest rate rises (US? / internationally?) could be bad for
utilities and reit though, so I only bought BGT.
Two foreign bond funds: RPIBX, BEGBX
Like poster above me pointed out, Dodge and Cox ain't bad.
You may also want to look into:
You may also want to look into these int'l funds:
BJBIX (8.76% since 11/22/05 not including dividends)
TAVIX (6.44% since 12/27/05 not including dividends)
BJBIX (8.76% since 11/22/04 not including dividends)
TAVIX (6.44% since 12/27/04 not including dividends)
I also like some of the Matthews Asian Funds for
exposure to asia:
exposure to asia. I think Asia excluding Japan
has room to rise, but if PRC and Taiwan starts a war ...:
http://www.matthewsfunds.com
EUROX for exposure to Eastern Europe and Russia (risky?)
IFN for India (risky?)
BHP for exposure commodities (but this has gone up quite a bit
already)
BHP for exposure commodities
PBR for oil (risky?)
MPGFX (my favourite US fund)
US growth stocks starting to look tasty again, please fall some
more.
\_ Yeah, I already have 70% of my portfolio in international
funds, mostly ETFs but I am curious about the REIT, utility
and inflation indexed bonds. I have most of my 401k in MRIVX.
\_ The only foreign fund my 401K offers is an EAFE index fund.
Yes, I thought BGT, MFD and IGR are interesting choices
to know about. |
| 2005/3/15 [Computer/SW/OS/Linux, Computer/SW/Compilers] UID:36700 Activity:high |
3/15 Anyone know what I'm doing wrong?
"In file included from fusd/test/zero.c:39:
/usr/include/linux/config.h:5:2: #error Incorrectly using glibc
headers for a kernel module"
Which correct -I path should I include in the compiler? -ok thx
\_ <kernel src dir>/include --jwm
\_ so actually I'm using /home/user/linux-2.6.10/include
which I downloaded from the web.
\_ use -nostdinc |
| 2005/3/15-16 [Consumer/PDA, Reference/Military] UID:36701 Activity:moderate |
3/15 Anyone know what the big plot is next week for 24? who's the army
dude?
\_ I can't believe I actually watch this horrible show, but...
I don't think he's an army dude. He's a terrorist who's going
to disguise himself as an airforce pilot and they're going to
rub out/kidnap an actual airforce pilot and take the real pilot's
place. My guess is that this pilot is supposed to be the pilot for
Air Force One who's going to relieve the current pilot of AF1.
All of the plots are related. Plot to kidnap senator was so they
could insert the trojan to enable the override. Using the override
to cause nuclear meltdown was to keep AF1 in the air so that they
can eventually do the pilot switcheroo.
\_ How is it horrible?
\_ every female character is either a total bee-yotch or a
pathetic weakling for starters
\_ I think you should watch Alias instead. ;)
\_ I think you should watch Desperate Housewives.
\_ I'm watching Quantum Leap!
\_ Who knows? Who cares? Just wait a week instead of spoiling it.
\_ I can't, I can't!!!!
\_ All you need to know to appreciate 24, which is horrible but
amusiing nonetheless, is this: Kiefer Sutherland does something
crazy each episode, and usually crazier than last season/week.
-dans |
| 2005/3/15 [Uncategorized] UID:36702 Activity:high |
3/15 Would you watch the 49ers if Aaron Rodgers plays with them?
\_ The who if the what now?
\_ CS geeks are not sports geeks too?
\_ I don't think Rodgers will succeed if he goes to the 49ers, but
not to worry, I think it's highly unlikely the 49ers draft him.
(They'd have to pay #1 QB money). -tom
\_ they will have trouble trading down in this draft.
Rodgers will do well in two years.
\_ not without an O-line or defense. The 49ers have much more
pressing needs than QB. -tom
\_ It'd be kind of cool if he ends up on the Dolphins.
They have a lot of the same problems on the o-line as the
49ers, but at least they have a decent coach and an owner
who'll shell out the bucks if need be.
\_ I want Rodgers to go to the Niners so we can watch him
play in person. O-Line will be improved.
\_ I think Rodgers needed one more year under Tedford. I see him almost
like Kyle Boller, struggling for awhile. |
| 2005/3/15-17 [Computer/Companies/Yahoo] UID:36703 Activity:nil |
3/15 Lots of jobs in Yahoo! Search:
/usr/local/csua/pub/jobs/yahoo-search
\_ permissions
\_ yahoo-search: Permission denied
\_ top hiring priority: unix systems administrators
\_ I think you mean: /csua/pub/jobs/yahoo-search -dans
\_ po-tay-to, po-tah-to, it's still the same thing |
| 2005/3/15-16 [Finance/Investment] UID:36704 Activity:moderate |
3/15 http://CNN.com now has bar charts linked in from the front page with before and after annual benefits comparing (1) the current system and (2) a new system with 4% of wages contributed to private accounts and indexing of minimum benefits to prices rather than wages. For a person born in 2005, the guaranteed benefit of a low-income individual would be $3,000/year, compared to $15,500/year under the old system! (Yes, this assumes that Mr. Loser invests all of his private account into "approved mutual fund gone broke". Guess who will be supporting Mr. Loser and his failed private account? I guess his kids or some private charity. Yay!) Granted, the $15,500/year figure assumes we don't change the system at all, which doesn't make sense if there isn't enough money to cover all payments starting in 2042. Any bar charts should really be comparing (1) The Democratic Proposal vs. (2), so people should really start providing graphs for (1). What is the Democratic Proposal? Raising the retirement age by a year from 67 to 68, or increasing the income bracket taxed for SS. Hmm, actually, that would make the graph look like (1) the current system, wouldn't it? \_ Does the system actually go broke in 2042 or does it simply pay less benefits? \_ Depends on how you look at it, but I guess "less benefits" is better. \_ I think in the classic bankruptcy definition there's a big difference. \_ the wording has been updated -op |
| 2005/3/15-16 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:36705 Activity:moderate |
3/15 http://csua.org/u/bdm (Washington Post poll) Question 24: 56% of Americans still think Saddam had WMDs. Question 9: 56% of Americans support private accounts, 56% of Americans also support taxing all income for Social Security instead of the first $90K. What does this tell me? Americans want to be able to invest part of their Social Security payments into the stock market and reap increased yields. Americans also want the gubmint to cover their asses if the stock market goes south. Yay! \_ Heh (pro/against), Korea (47/34), Vietnam (24/69), Gulf (82/15), Afghanistan (93/6), Iraq (48/51). You know, in every major conflict known to mankind, soldiers bring back beautiful local hotties back to their vatherlands. I wonder how long before US soldiers bring Viet^D^D^D^DIraqi hotties back to the States. \_ iraqis not so hotties as iranian \_ Apparently you like the female mustache? |
| 2005/3/15-16 [Uncategorized] UID:36706 Activity:nil |
3/15 Brian Nichols worked eight years for Hewlett-Packard, making roughly
"six figures" annually. "He's a smart person." |
| 2005/3/15-17 [Computer/SW/OS/Linux] UID:36707 Activity:nil Edit_by:auto |
3/15 Does anyone have the Tablet PC? Pros/cons? Linux-friendly? Comments?
\_ I've used a friend's for a while and the thing that makes it worth
a couple hundred more than a standard PC is the pen input and
good support for that in the OS and applications. WinXp tablet has
overall pretty good support for pen input and handwriting
recognition. I don't know anything about Linux support, and perhaps
someone else can comment on it, but if I had to guess I'd expect it
to be far inferior to Windows-land. User interfaces and esoteric
peripheral support are not areas where Linux is known to shine.
\_ http://www.tabletpcreviewspot.com
http://www.tabletpctalk.com |
| 2005/3/15-17 [Computer/SW/Editors/Emacs] UID:36708 Activity:nil |
3/15 Partha and/or emacs guru, how do I make my cursor blink?
\_ Is it really so hard to M-x apropos and search for blink?
\- i usually run emacs in a terminal so this is a
non-issue. you can look for kyle jones' package
for frame-based modes. His packages are of good
quality, e.g. crypt++, VM, filladapt etc. --psb
\_ My emacs21 in XP, SunOS5 and Linux all have blinking cursor by
default. I didn't do anything special to turn it on. |
| 3/15 |