[techtalk] USB Support?
I'm about to begin an installation of Redhat 7.0 on my Dell Laptop (Inspiron 3700). I've attempted this before, unsuccessfully with RH 6.0. Had display problems and couldn't get my dsl working. But I digress. I've been away from Linux for awhile, and I wouldn't call myself an OS/HW guru by any means. My question is what is the hw support like for USB? I have a USB CD-RW drive, that I can't seem to get running in Win2k. I haven't seen my model on RedHat's HCL site. Is this an ill-fated exercise? Is anyone doing this? Thanks in advance Shari ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
RE: [techtalk] USB Support? -- answered my own question
And it makes me very sad .. from Linux HOWTO... oh well. At least I have the MAC! 1.5 Supported CD-writers USB CD-writers are currently not supported at all. Apart from that you can safely assume that most newer IDE/ATAPI- and SCSI-writers work under Linux. Newer drives are mostly MMC-compliant and are therefore supported. If the SCSI-version of a particular writer works, the IDE/ATAPI-version will most likely work and vice versa. However, some people want to get a warm and fuzzy feeling by reading the exact model of their writer in some sort of compatibility list. That is the reason why I didn't throw the following list out of the HOWTO. ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] Dual-Boot Nonsense Confusing Me
Here's hoping some kind soul will help me out I'm running Win2k, using Partition Magic. I can't seem to get a clean boot into either OS without using the appropriate boot disks. I can't figure out what's going on. I'm getting the same errors over and over again (At least I'm consistent!) I've given up on BootMagic. The MBR always gets corrupted, and it never seems to find where I've installed linux. I've edited lilo.conf to start up win32, but it simply hangs. I'm not quite sure I have it pointed to the right start up partition. It also seems LILO is probably the better way to boot up, but I'm nervous about losing my win2k installation if something else is in the MBR. I've gone through several permutations on my physical drives. I've tried creating Linux on its own primary partition, and also 3 logical drive partitions (which, oddly, seems to work the best). Anyway ... I'M SO CLOSE!!! I just need a little direction on how to get these 2 os to coexist peacefully. I'm trying to avoid reinstalling Win2K if at all possible. Any help would be appreciated! ;) Shari ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] Dual-Boot Nonsense Confusing Me
*thud* That's the sound of me hitting the floor as a result of actually getting this thing working. All I had to do was fix my lilo.conf file to recognize win2k on the right partition and take BootMagic off of my Win2k installation and both o/s started up fine. So, thanks mandi and abe for helping me out with this. Next stop on my installation train -- DSL!! shari ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
[techtalk] XP vs UML
Sorry if this is grossly off-topic or if its been covered... I was curious if anyone out there has any thoughts on this particular topic. I work for a consulting firm and we are attempting to turn ourselves into a real UML shop, but when I think about it, most of our projects take the XP approach (albeit accidentally!) I say this because more and more, I see our projects become client/deadline driven. The intial functionality we design gets stripped in order to meet dates. Part of me thinks, if we simplify from the very start, maybe we can avoid this. For example, code only the bare minimum functionality needed; assume we can always add stuff later; don't create frameworks, etc. I do UML design models like crazy, but so much doesn't get implemented, it almost doesn't seem worth it. But on the other hand, shouldn't a clean framework save you more time later? Any thoughts? Does anyone actually use XP as a design approach? Shari ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] XP vs UML
>I'm firmly in the UML camp, but in the minimalist wing. I agree with this sentiment. UML has its pros and cons, and I definitely think the more high-level, the better. >They "rapidly" turn out code that deals with the most obvious aspects >of the problem, but is structuraly at odds with the complete >requirements. Yeah, about that, where do the requirements come in? One thing that is foggy to me (and maybe its because I can't seem to get past the thick marketing hype of XP) is where do the actual business/use-case requirements come in? Do they ever? Is it more of a strong end-user involvement in the design process than anything else? Come up with a metaphor, get a team together, start coding only what you need, etc. >They then "rapidly" pile on layer after layer of fixes and "exception >handling" until they have complete chaos. I like the team aspect of it, brain-storming, etc. There is a kind of guerilla-coding mentality that does appeal to me on some level. But I'm also tired of 80-work weeks during deployment/implementation. > But I rely on the rigors of a methodology to check myself to make certain I have at >last spun consistent delusions. No comment here, just found this amusing ;-) So *that's* what methodologies are for! >But I always have determined in advance, what information I >have to have in the model for it to be complete, as least as >far as a given feature goes. There's a place in the model >for that information, if it is missing the model is not complete. > >Period. Agreed. And, your model is also only as good as the business requirements you have gathered. And ... how well your tech team follows it (another topic, maybe). Certain people (ahem, those management types) seem to think that 80-90% of the actual design work should be done before the development/construction process begins, but I think even with a good, complete model there's always scope creep, which can turn into design changes. At least with UML you can see where you started from! ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] XP vs UML
I have to say, the team aspect of development/programming is what I like best about it. That's what is the most appealing aspect of XP to me. Stronger involvement with all members. With UML, here anyway, it seems to happen like this: 1) The Project Manager goes to client meetings, gathers requirements, creates use-cases as to the functionality of the app. 2) The Project Architect (that would be me) reviews the use-cases and activity diagrams (and sometimes goes to client meetings, if she promises not to make too much noise and draw undecipherable whiteboard diagrams). 3) After reviewing use-cases, etc., the PA comes up with class diagrams and sequence diagrams with documentation ad-naud. Hands off said diagrams to technical team. "Go forth and code ... my children!" 4) Tech team reviews the models and codes accordingly. BTW, I'm not sure if this piece actually happens! It seems like the end-result looks different in a lot of cases from how the design model began. This is a management problem on my end. Because we do iterative development, I'm usually on the next phase, and there's a thin line (IMO) between making sure the tech team follows the model and micro-management. -- shari >For those who've done application or OS programming as well as web >programming, what do you see are the major differences? Major similarities. >Which do you like best and why? I've been thinking of delving into some >application programming, but it seems a bit daunting to me. > >Michelle > >Michelle Murrain, Ph.D. >President >Norwottuck Technology Resources >[EMAIL PROTECTED] >http://www.norwottuck.com > ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
Re: [techtalk] More XP vs UML
Many thanks to all the valuable postings regarding this topic. It's interesting to hear the other war stories and approaches. I think I just have to take a more involved approach with the team members, get everyone deep into it at all levels. This really *isn't* a hierarchy here, I think it's just a matter of getting everyone on the same page (help! I sound like a manager!) But, in reference to our original topic -- I think I have a larger problem than picking a software methodology that will work. I think there may be some projects where XP is the right approach, and others where UML is more appropriate. This thread seems to have turned into, how to manage a project life-cycle in a way that doesn't burn everyone out. Even with all the organizational nightmares, I'm still feeling pretty good about taking my first consumer-oriented project live this morning. shari ___ techtalk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/techtalk
