On Sat, 19 Aug 2000, Mallard wrote:
> Thanks for wasting the two hours I had today to do some programming!
>
You always have entertaining e-mails about problems you have. Some are
valid, but some others can be solved by having a bit more patience, and
checking the documentation more.
> I was compiling just fine in 7.0 after figuring out how to install
> everything I needed. now I do a clean install of 7.1 "developer" and
> everything else is installed to compile C++ except the libsrcc++ or
> whatever you call it.
>
I believe it's called libstdc++-devel. I don't like the fact that it's on
cd2, as a lot of beginning cs students tend to try Linux for the first
time in a c++ programming class.
> Make can't find fstream.h a basic every day file it should have if you
> install "developer" I would think.
>
I wouldn't call fsteam.h a basic file. It is mostly for cs students
learning c++. I would say stdlib.h and stdio.h far surpass the importance
of fstream.h.
> So I go to your BUGGY drakRPM and click on the install for the RPM and
> it asks for cdrom2. Like I know what that is. I put in the "sources" CD,
> figuring that is #2 because there were only two CD's in 7.1 I got for
> $30.
>
Drakrpm is not fun, try to use urpmi instead. Or you may want to give
Debian a shot (www.debian.org) It's package manager is much better, and
less GUI dependant.
> It spins the CD and sits there looking like a typical BUGGY windows
> program, not telling me it didn't find "cdrom2" or maybe the file wasn't
> there, who knows.
>
I agree on this point. I almost never use Drakrpm for any reason.
I prefer the rpmfind program on rpmfind.net, it is much superior.
> HOW ABOUT SOME USER FEEDBACK ONCE AND A WHILE? Did you guys forget how
> to bring up a dialog box and print into it? No, instead let's let the
> user guess what's happening.
I don't know the details, but it looks like Drakrpm calls urpmi to do the
dirty work. The Inter Process Communications between URPMI and DrakRPM
seem to be minimal.
>
> Besides that, what lame program dissapears while it's "updating RPM
> base" ? I have never seen anything like that before, makes you think it
> crashed. Who is teaching these kids to program now days?
>
DrakRPM needs some reworking.
> Then I do another lame thing, go into file manager root>mnt>cdrom so I
> can see my cdrom (no mandrake couldn't have made little easy to find
> links for them, too busy playing doom or something to spend 2 minutes
> making things easier for the 1000's of users that will get your dist) -
> then I find the file is on the main CD, but no it's not the file, it's
> some other c++ goodie I have no clue what is for, so I don't think it's
> here at all. WHY NOT? Is there a more $$ version with this ONE FILE in
> it?
Probably not, but if your are using "file manager" to find things instead
of the shell, I would suppose that mostly only newbies use the GUI tools
to do adminning.
> OK, so I go to the main site and do a search, try it, try to find it.
> What the hell was it called? I don't remember, should have writen it
> down. But geeks always write this stuff down, that's the point, we want
> you to not have a life like we do, suffer like us, that's what Linux is
> all about, "I wasted my life figuring this out, so I will now make
> others do it too!" - is that the motto here?
>
That's not true. Open source was meant to help the community. One
programmer is meant to be able to reuse parts of another's programs.
Perhaps if you had been more cautious to do so, then the problem would
not have been as severe.
> So I decide to get smart ass, I am gonna get it from 7.0 and screw you
> too! So I find it on 7.0, no thanks to the BROKEN search feature in
> drakeRPM, looking for fstream.h, and the way you have to tell it to go
> look on the cdrom, what type of user interface is that called?
>
Not a very good idea, as header files tend to change between different
versions of gcc. Besides, how did you bypass the RPM dependancies?
I know you can force it, but that is just plain wrong.
> I find it and try to use kpackage to install it. It does, but in
> usr/include/c++-2/ that's the secret directory. So now it should make
> just fine, RIGHT?
>
You can just do a 'rpm -ql <packagename>' to list the files of the
package. Kpackage is for weenies :)
> No, because make or gcc or whatever is configured to look in another
> newer directory that mandrake made up FOR SOME REASON (HINT HINT???)
> called c++-3 even though it's the same files. So like the smart ass I am
> I make a directory called that and put the files in there.
>
It was probably more of a choice of gcc rather than Mandrake. I don't
think Mandrake has too much influence on the gcc developers who wrote the
compiler.
> AH HA! make finds the files and compiles, but wait! MORE ERRORS? on a
> program that compiled just fine before? YES!! ios() has errors! it
> didn't before, so now what???
>
Perhaps check to see if you have the proper kernel-headers for your
running kernel. You can find this out by typing 'uname -a'.
> Well my 2 hours are up, I wasted my life like you wanted. THANK YOU!
>
I'm sorry for all your problems, and I can understand that some things
need work, but please try to respect the preferences of the experts on
this group.
I also have to thank you for getting me more involved in vi. It wass your
discussion that led me to read the entire manual for it. Before that, I
only knew some basic editing, but now I know a lot more.
> You guys owe me a new updated 7.1 CD set when you get your act together.
> I am calling your customer service line and returning this crap back to
> you. BAD JOB on this one!
>
Some stuff overall needs reworking in 7.1. I think Mandrake was a bit
hasty in turning out this release. The X config is broken for some cards.
> Now I have to waste more time re-installing 7.0 so I can do a simple
> make. WHAT A JOKE!
>
Please, just ask for some help, and nicely too. I'm sure most of the
people on this list have some experience porgramming, and can help.
> I gave you $30 instead of updating 7.0 because I thought I would
> contribute to the effort, I was wrong.
>
7.1 has it's share of oddities, so I'm not totally disagreeing on your
viewpoint. For example, the way to boot a CD off the PCMCIA cdrom on my
Sony Superslim notebook was working in 7.0 as "linux ide1=0x180,0x386" It
was working in every other kernel, and distro, but 7.1 broke that
compatibility, forcing me to install thru the HD method.
--
Regards,
Ellick Chan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Aug 19
